^q. 






X^^.. 



V^^ "^>. 



\x^^' 







ft ft ^ -Ni , 1 ft ^-^ 1/ JJ s \ • 






c- 



v-^' 



.-^' 



.^^ 






• -,/•■ 



^^'<^^ 



N '/ ^ 



X^^^. 






A 



cu, 



-'^ 



- ^^ c'^- 






V 



.0<?<. 



■^^ 



'/ O 



•f^ 



,<^ 



o> 







4\V tP 










■"^^S^ 



.X^ 



O' 









-i 



"oO^ 






%^' 










v"^ 






.0^ 














COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY STUDIES IN ENGLISH 
AND COMPARATIVE LITERATURE 



SPENSER'S SHEPHERD'S CALENDER 



COLUMBIA 

UNIVERSITY PRESS 

SALES AGENTS 

New York: 
LEMCKE & BUECHNER 
30-32 West 27th Street 

London: 
HENRY FROWDE 
Amen Corner, E.C. 

Toronto: 

HENRY FROWDE 

25 Richmond Street, W. 



SPENSER'S SHEPHERD'S CALENDER 



IN EELATION TO 



CONTEMPORARY AFFAIRS 



BY 



JAMES JACKSON HIGGINSON, Ph.D. 



^mff 




COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 
1912 

All rights reserved 



tt^ 






9^ 



<> 



Copyright, 1912 
By Columbia University Press 

Printed from type September, 1912 



Press of 

Tmc new Era Printin* COMPAir 

Lancaster, p*. 



C' CI.A34J0488 



This Monograph has been approved by the Department of Eng- 
lish and Comparative Literature in Columbia University as a con- 
tribution to knowledge worthy of publication. 

A. H. THORNDIKE, 
Secretary. 



To 

My Mother 
MARGARET GRACIE HIGGINSON 



FOREWOED 

My reasons for the use of the rather unusual spelling — 
Shepherd's Calender — of Spenser's poem are much the 
same as those advanced by Mr. Walter W. Greg in his his- 
tory of Pastoral Poetry and Pastoral Drama (London, A. 
H. Bullen, 1906). I quote his remarks on the title of this 
poem: "the title of the collection as originally published'^ 
is obviously ambiguous — is 'Shepheardes' to be considered 
as singular or plural ? There is a tendency among modern 
critics to evade the difficulty in such cases by quoting titles 
in the original spelling. I confess that this practice seems 
to me both clumsy and pedantic. In the present case there 
can be little doubt that the title of Spenser's work was 
suggested by the Calender of Shepherds. On the other 
hand, I think it is likewise clear that the poet, in adopting 
it, was thinking particularly of Colin Clout that he in- 
tended, that is, to call his poems 'the calender of the shep- 
herd' (see first line of postscript^), rather than 'the cal- 
ender for shepherds.' I have therefore adopted the sing- 
ular form. 'Calender' is, I think, a defensible spelling.'" 

Although it has seemed unnecessary to append a bibli- 
ography to this work, chiefly for two reasons — the more or 
less complete citation of titles in the notes, and the inad- 
visability of enlarging the bulk of this volume, — it may be 
as well to mention the works of those writers from whom I 
have derived my chief assistance. Of these, the following 
short list contains the most important: 

* Shepheardes Calender, 

'I, e. the Epilogue. 

' Op. cit., p. 82, note 1. 

ix 



X Spenser's shepherd's calender 

The Calendars of State Papers, Domestic, Foreign, Span- 
ish, Irish, relating to the reign of Elizabeth, published 
under the supervision of the Public Kecord OflBee (par- 
ticularly the Domestic Series, 1547-1580, edited in 1856 by 
Robert Lemon, and the Addenda to the foregoing, 1566- 
1579, edited in 1871 by Mary Anne Everett Green). 

The Publications of the Eoyal Historical Manuscript 
Commission, containing catalogues and abstracts of the 
historical archives existing in the principal public and pri- 
vate repositories throughout Great Britain. 

Froude, James Anthony. The History of England from 
the Fall of Wolsey to the Death of Elizabeth, 12 vols., Chas. 
Scribner & Co., New York, 1870. 

Strype, John. Annals of the Beformation and Estab- 
lishment of Religion . . . in the Church of England, dur- 
ing Queen Elizabeth's happy reign, first published in 1708- 
37 ; new edition, 4 vols., divided into 7 parts, Oxford, 1824. 

Strype, John. Historical Collections of the Life and 
Acts of John Aylmer, etc., first published in 1701 ; new 
edition, Oxford, 1821. 

Strype, John. History of the Life and Acts of Edmund 
Grindal, etc., first published in 1710 ; new edition, Oxford, 
1821. 

Strype, John. Life and Acts of Matthew Parker, etc., 
first published in 1711 ; new edition, 3 vols., Oxford, 1821. 

Strype, John. Life and Acts of John Whit gift, etc., first 
published in 1718; new edition, 3 vols., Oxford, 1822. 

Cooper, Charles H. and Thompson. Athenae Cantabrigi- 
enses, 2 vols., Cambridge, 1858-61. 

Cooper, Charles H. Annals of Cambridge, 4 vols., Cam- 
bridge, 1842-52. 

Mullinger, James Bass. The University of Cambridge 
from the Royal Injunctions of 1535 to the Accession of 
Charles the First (vol. I of his complete history), Cam- 
bridge, 1884. 



IN RELATION TO CONTEMPOKAEY APFAIRS XI 

Ely Episcopal Records, edited by A. Gibbons, Lincoln, 
1891. 

Campbell, Douglas. The Puritan in Holland, England, 
and America, 2 vols., New York, 1892. 

Collection of State Papers relating to Affairs in the 
reigns of King Henry VIII, King Edward VI, Queen Mary 
and Queen Elizabeth . . . transcribed from original letters 
hy William Cecill Lord Burghley, 2 vols. ; vol. I, referring 
to the years 1542-70, edited by Samuel Haynes, London, 
1740; vol. II, referring to the years 1571-96, edited by 
William Murdin, London, 1759. 

Letters and Memorials of State in the Beigns of Queen 
Mary, Queen Elizabeth, King James . . . written and col- 
lected by Sir Henry Sydney . . . Sir Philip Sydney and 
. . . Sir Robert Sydney, etc., 2 vols, in one, edited by 
Arthur CoUins, London, 1746. 

Burnet, Gilbert. The History of the Reformation, etc., 
a new edition by Nicholas Pocoek, 7 vols., Oxford, 1865. 

Hallam, Henry. The Constitutional History of England, 
etc., 3 vols., London, 1867. 

The works of Strype are especially valuable, not on 
account of his peculiar methods of writing history, of 
course, but because of the large number of original papers 
which he has printed from MSS. contained in the British 
Museum and other repositories. 

It is perhaps necessary to point out that the division of 
the second chapter of my work into separate articles has 
occasioned a certain small amount of repetition in some 
places, noticeable, for instance, in the sections on the Areo- 
pagus and the Biography of Spenser {1576-1580). The 
importance of the subjects discussed will form my apology, 
if any is deemed necessary. 

In conclusion, I take this opportunity of recording my 
deep appreciation of the assistance which has been rendered 



xii Spenser's shepherd's calender 

me in the composition of my work by various gentlemen. 
To Dr. G. Howard Maynadier of Harvard I am indebted 
for the beginning of my interest in the poetry of Spenser, 
and to Professor Harry M. Ayres of Columbia I am under 
obligations for generous and unstinted advice given at all 
times, and for the final reading and correction of my com- 
pleted dissertation before it was sent to the press. To 
Professor Jefferson B. Fletcher, whose attainments as a 
scholar are too well known to make it necessary for me to 
dwell on them, and under whose direction I have pursued 
the work which has culminated in this study, it lies without 
my power to pay a higher compliment than to say that, 
except for his stimulating influence, the book would never 
have been written. Finally, I wish to extend my sincere 
thanks to Mr. F. W. Erb, the superintendent of the loan 
department of the Columbia University library, to his 
brother, Mr. F. C. Erb, and to his sister. Miss A. M. Erb, 
whose kindly readiness to do everything in their power for 
the accommodation of scholars and readers goes far to make 
the Columbia library what it is to-day, the best regulated 
public library in the United States. To the Messrs. Charles 
F. Claar, the principal assistant at the loan desk, and 
Mitchell Wechsler, the attendant in charge of Room 306, 
in which I have pursued the bulk of my work, as well as to 
other employes of the library, I acknowledge with thanks 
the pleasant attention which they have always given me in 
the matter of securing books. 



CONTENTS 

Page 

Chapter I. The Political and Ecclesiastical Satire of 
the Shepherd's Calender 
i. Historical Background. 

(1) The Ecclesiastical Policy of Elizabeth and the 

Conditions to which it gave rise 1 

(2) The Puritans and their Eelation to the Eccles- 

iastical Policy of Elizabeth 16 

(3) Academic Disputes in Cambridge (156^76) . . 30 
ii. The Political and Ecclesiastical Eclogues of the 

Shepherd's Calender. 

(1) Introduction to the Present Theory 38 

(2) The February Eclogue 45 

(3) The May Eclogue 71 

(4) The July Eclogue 99 

(5) The September Eclogue 112 

(6) Conclusion: Relation to the Puritanism of the 

Faerie Queene 150 

Chapter II. The Biographical Eelations of the Shep- 
herd's Calender 

i, Edward Kirke: E. K; Cuddie 165 

ii. The Interlocutors of the Ecclesiastical Eclogues: 

Palinode, Piers, Diggon Davie, Thomalin .... 181 

iii. Eosalind 203 

iv. The Poet and his Patrons: Lobbin, Dido, and 

"Maister Philip Sidney" 231 

V. The Shepherd's Calender and the Areopagus... 257 
vi. The Biography of Spenser (1576-1580) 286 

Appendix A. Mr. Greenlaw's Theory 339 

Index 349 

xiii 



Dum vivimus vivamus 



SPENSER'S SHEPHERD'S CALENDER 

IN RELATION TO 

CONTEMPORARY AFFAIRS 



CHAPTER I 



THE POLITICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL SATIKE OF THE 
SEEPHEBD'S CALENDER 

i. Historical Background 

The February, May, July, and September eclogues of the 
Shepherd's Calender contain attacks on ecclesiastical 
and political conditions which existed during the first half 
of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and describe, under an ob- 
scure allegory, transactions connected with the policy pur- 
sued by herself and her chief adviser. Lord Burghley. The 
full significance of this satire has never been satisfactorily 
explained, and, in order to understand its relation to the 
history of Spenser's own times, it will be necessary to 
consider in some detail the following subjects : the ecclesias- 
tical policy of Elizabeth and the conditions which it created 
in the Anglican Church ; the activities of the Puritans and 
their relation to this policy; and the academic conflicts in 
Cambridge during the period of Spenser's connection with 
the University. First of all I shall take up the Church pol- 
icy of Elizabeth. 

(1) The Ecclesiastical Policy of Elizabeth and the Condi- 
tions to which it gave rise 

It is evident to students of Elizabethan history that 
political motives, rather than any deep-seated religious con- 



2 SPENSER S SHEPHERD S CALENDER 

viction, forced Elizabeth at the beginning of her reign into 
the arms of the Protestant party. Mary Stuart, the widow 
of the short-lived Francis II, stood next in succession to the 
English crown and was supported by the Catholic power 
of France. If Elizabeth had openly declared in favor of 
the Catholic religion, her life would not have been safe 
from the machinations of the Catholic party, who had been 
taught by the Pope to regard her as illegitimate. On the 
other hand, she could not at first commit herself to a strong 
Protestant policy, for the Catholics not only numbered a 
majority of the nobility, but also a greater part of the 
population of England.^ Some intermediary scheme, there- 
fore, was necessary which would conciliate both the Catho- 
lics and the ultra-Protestants, the followers of Calvin, and 
it was upon this policy that the doctrine and government of 
her Church were formed. 

In conformity with this design Elizabeth's first Parlia- 
ment (1559), w^hich was strongly Protestant, enacted three 
important ecclesiastical measures: the First Fruits Act, 
which allotted to the crown the first year's income of all 
benefices to which a new incumbent had been appointed, 
and also a tenth part of their total annual revenues; the 
Act of Supremacy, which acknowledged the Queen the 
supreme head of the Church, empowering her to nominate 
all bishops and to control the ecclesiastical state, and re- 
quiring a subscription to its provisions on the part of all 
holders of livings and offices in Church and State ; and the 
Act of Uniformity, which revived in a slightly altered form 
the Common Prayer Book drawn up in the reign of Ed- 
ward VI. To the two latter acts diverse severe penalties 

^ Distresses of the Commonwealth, quoted by Proude, VII, p. 21 : 
"the Catholics were in the majority in every county in England 
except Middlesex and Kent." Cf. also ibid., p. 11, for numbers of 
Protestants and numbers of those opposed to theological controversy. 



POLICY OF ELIZABETH 3 

involving forfeiture of office and imprisonment were 
attached. "The object had been so to frame the constitu- 
tion of the Church of England that disloyalty alone should 
exclude a single English subject from its communion who 
in any true sense could be called a Christian; so to frame 
its formulas that they might be patient of a Catholic or 
Protestant interpretation . . . that the Church should pro- 
fess and teach a uniform doctrine in essentials . . . while 
in non-essentials it should contain ambiguous phrases . . . 
and thus enable Catholic, Lutheran, Calvinist, and Zwing- 
lian to insist each that the Church of England was theirs. ' '- 
In this way the final power to direct the policy of the 
Church lay in the hands of the Queen and her advisers, and 
the strictness or leniency with which the ecclesiastical stat- 
utes should be enforced was subject to varying motives of 
political expediency. Whatever Elizabeth's religious con- 
victions may have been, if indeed she had any, they were 
always made secondary to her political position as head of 
the Church and the State. When the Protestant party, 
from whom she derived her chief support at her accession, 
required conciliation, she deprived her sister's Catholic 
prelates of their sees and filled their places with men of the 
opposite party, many of whom had been exiles for the sake 
of religion.^ When the Queen's life was in danger at the 
time of a threatened war with Spain (1563), Elizabeth 
directed the enactment of a Penal Bill aimed at the Catho- 
lics, which provided that "all persons who maintained the 
Pope's authority or refused the oath of allegiance to the 
Queen, for the first offense should incur a premunire, for 

'Ibid., pp. 81-2. 

' Ibid., p. 76. Scory, Grindal, Cox, Whitehead, Aylmer, Horne, 
Guest, and Jewel were the most distinguished of the exiled 
Reformers during Mary's reign. Whitehead was offered the Arch- 
bishopric of Canterbury^ which he refused. The others, except Aylmer^ 
were among Elizabeth's first appointees to bishoprics. 



4 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

the second the pains of treason ".* When, on the other 
hand, Elizabeth wished to conciliate the Catholic powers 
and to create the belief that she would eventually establish 
the older religion, she restored the crucifix in the Chapel 
Royal (1559), or listened to a sermon from the High Church 
Bishop of Rochester who preached the Catholic doctrine that 
the Eucharist contained the real presence of Christ. Or, at 
another time, when she wished to silence the increasing 
clamors of the Puritans, she insisted upon a strict adherence 
to the Act of Uniformity "in all its parts'',^ and openly 
rebuked Nowell, the Dean of St. Paul's, for attacking the 
use of images. In the same way the statutes were strictly 
enforced against the Catholics at the time of the insurrec- 
tion of the northern Earls (1569). Elizabeth, in short, 
despised all controversies, and she was never tired of de- 
claring that no one should be troubled for conscience 's sake 
as long as he outwardly conducted himself in a manner un- 
repugnant to the laws of the realm. 

This fluctuating policy, however, whatever its political 
benefits to Elizabeth and to the national importance of 
England may have been, did not conduce to a godliness of 
life and a strict adherence to the dictates of conscience 
among the clergy. The cloudiness of the political horizon 
at her accession made it necessary for Elizabeth to appoint 
to the higher ecclesiastical dignities men whom she could 
control and who would be worldly enough to carry out her 
capricious commands. She had no use for the Cranmers 
and the Latimers of Protestantism, men who would suffer 

* Ibid., p. 501. The statute of premunire, an ordinance of 
1305, subsequently revived from time to time with modifications, 
"condemned to outlawry, forfeiture, and imprisonment all persons 
who, having prosecuted in foreign courts suits cognizable by the law 
of England, should not appear in obedience to summons, and answer 
for their contempt" (Stubbs, Constitutional History, III, p. 330). 

^Froude, VIII, pp. 137, 140. 



POLICY OF ELIZABETH 

martyrdom for the truth. Her prelates were made of 
weaker fibre. They had seen the established religion 
change too often not to expect that it might change again, 
and their actions were in most cases governed by this con- 
tingency. Their day might be a short one, and they deter- 
mined to make the most of their opportunities. "Within 
two years of its (the Church of England's) establishment, 
the prelates were alienating the estates in which they pos- 
sessed but a life-interest — granting long leases and taking 
fines for their own advantage ' ',^ and the men who did these 
things were intended to be examples of righteous dealing 
and godly living. Parker, Archbishop of Canterbury, who 
attempted to refuse this see, because ''he did not seek his 
own private gain or ease", and because ''he had but two or 
three years more of life before him, and did not intend to 
heap up for his children 'V at his death, seventeen years 
later, left behind him an enormous sum, which had been 
accumulated by the most flagrant practices of corruption.* 
He sold his own patronage and his interest with others, and 
he made use of a graduated scale of payments, which 
allowed even children under fourteen years to be inducted 
into a benefice. Scory, Bishop of Hereford, was notorious 
for simony. Here is what an eminent contemporary says 
of him: "so as what with pulling down houses and selling 
the lead, and such loose endes; what with setting up good 
husbandries; what with leases to his tennants, ... he 
heaped together a great masse of wealth".^ After his death 

•.Froude, VII, p. 475. The system of fines, which ruined the 
property of the sees, consisted in the grant or the renewal of a lease 
at a rent lower than usual in consideration of a cash payment, a fine, 
levied at the time of the said grant or renewal. The benefice-holder, 
therefore, obtained a sum of money, and the benefice obtained a lower 
rent, which depleted its income. 

' Burnet-Pocock, II, p. 626, 

^Froude, XI, p. 100. 

* Harington, Nugae Antiquae, II, p. 176. 



6 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

a long suit took place about the dilapidations of his diocese. 
The same authority speaks of Young, Archbishop of York 
(1560-8), who pulled down "a goodly hall, only for greedi- 
ness of the lead that covered it".^" 

On the 4th of December, 1577, the Lords of the Council 
summoned Pilkington, the Dean of Durham, being "adver- 
tised that he hathe entermedled with the leavieng of a cer- 
ten somme of money upon the clergie of that Church which 
dothe not appertaine unto him"." This Pilkington, the 
brother of the Bishop of Durham, lent strongly towards the 
Puritans. Upon the death of his more distinguished 
brother a suit was instituted by his successor against the 
Dean for having converted to his own use a certain "over 
rent ' ' upon a lease of land which had formerly been allotted 
to the school at Rivington.^^ j^ 1578, Freake, the new 
Bishop of Norwich, had to be admonished by the Council to 
forbear from seizing certain legacies which his predecessor 
had made ad pios usus in an endeavor to recover money 
for dilapidations.^* Even the most honorable members of 
the clergy were not above suspicion. In 1575, upon his 
translation from York to Canterbury, Grindal was sued by 
Sandys, the new Archbishop of York, because ' ' he had used 
him hardly many ways, especially in matter of dilapida- 
tion". This suit, which was accompanied by another over 
the lease of the demesnes of Battersea,^* belonging to the 
see of York, caused friction between these two bishops, 
who are generally regarded as the most saintly Church 
dignitaries of that age. 

Aylmer, Bishop of London, was notorious for the despoil- 
ing of Church property. In the year 1579 he was called 

^"Ibid., p. 231. 

" Acts of the Privy Council, 1577-8, pp. 107-8. 

" Ibid., p. 163. 

" Ibid., pp. 369, 390. 

" Strype, Life of Grindal, p. 285. 



POLICY OF ELIZABETH 7 

before the Council to answer to the charges of making "a 
great spoil of the timber and wood" at Fulham, of selling 
"a great number of acres of wood", and of wasting the 
revenues of his bishopric in general.^^ When he succeeded 
to this see, which his predecessor, Sandys, vacated on March 
8, 1576, Aylmer instituted a suit against the latter to obtain 
the revenues of the bishopric from the previous Michaelmas 
(September 29), alleging that Sandys had received large 
monetary favors on his appointment to York. This so 
stirred the wrath of the latter that he wrote to Burghley : 
"coloured covetousness, an envious heart, covered with the 
coat of dissimulation, will, when opportunity serveth, shew 
itself". The whole proceeding illustrates the reluctance 
of the one to part with his possessions, as much as it does 
the avarice of the other to add to his store. 

In 1573 Dr. William Hughes succeeded to the bishopric 
of St. Asaph's. After fourteen years' incumbency charges 
were preferred against him for maladministration of his 
see, "Wherein was discovered that most of the great liv- 
ings within the diocese, some with cure of souls, and some 
without, were either holden by the bishop himself in com- 
mendam or else were in the possession of such men as 
dwelt out of the country. That there were held by him 
sixteen livings . . . that there was never a preacher within 
the diocese that kept ordinary hospitality, but only three. 
Whereby it came to pass, that the former accustomed good 
and charitable housekeeping was quite decayed in the 
diocese and particularly one, that had two of the greatest 
livings in the diocese, was so far from keeping hospitality, 
that he boarded himself in an ale-house. That divers par- 
cels of the bishopric were leased out, and confirmed by him, 
to the hinderance of his successors . . . that he had got all 
the keys of the chapter seal within the keeping of his own 

" Strype Life of Aylmer, pp. 46-7. 



8 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

chaplains, that he might confirm what he would himself, 
that in his visitation he caused the clergy of his diocese to 
pay for his diet, and of the rest of his train, over and above 
the 'procurations', appointed by the law for that pur- 
pose. ' '^" Such allegations rather under-state than magnify 
the prevalent state of ecclesiastical corruption. "Scan- 
dalous dilapidation, destruction of woods, waste of the 
property of the see by beneficial lease, the incumbent en- 
riching himself and his family at the expense of his suc- 
cessors — this is the substantial history of the Anglican 
hierarchy, with a few honourable exceptions, for the first 
twenty years of its existence. ' '" 

It is probable that the greed of courtiers, which Eliza- 
beth openly countenanced and which exerted a vicious in- 
fluence on her Church policy, greatly contributed to the 
degradation of the morals of the clergy. The abolition of 
the monasteries by Henry the Eighth opened a door to the 
easy attainment of wealth at the expense of the Church, 
and, although times were somewhat changed when Eliza- 
beth came to the throne, courtiers still looked with the 
greatest avidity upon ecclesiastical property, and were often 
rewarded with lucrative grants. From the position of a 
poverty-stricken nobleman, whose inheritance had been for- 
feited for his part in the Lady Jane Grey conspiracy. Lord 
Robert Dudley became the wealthiest peer of the realm 
through the lavish and illegal grants of Church leases and 
lands.^* Lord Burghley himself was not above such prac- 
tices,^^ although his enemies exaggerated his seizures of 
Church property.^" Unquestionably, however, it was an 

" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 435-6. 
" Froude, XI, p. 100. 

" Harington, Nugae Antiquae, II, p. 268 ; Froude, XI, p. 21. 
"Hallam, I, p. 206; Harington, ibid., p. 206; Camden, Annals, 
p. 607 ; Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 285 ff. 
^ Froude, XII, pp. 148-49. 



POLICY OF ELIZABETH 9 

easy matter for a favorite, such as Hatton, Raleigh, or 
Essex, to obtain grants of episcopal lands from their royal 
mistress, who treated her prelates in the most high-handed 
manner. If the courtier found the bishop refractory, he 
slandered him to the Queen. Lord North, to whom the 
Bishop of Ely had refused to grant the leases of two rich 
manors, drew up a series of complaints, and also preferred 
the charges of others, which alleged that the bishop had 
been guilty of gross misconduct in the administration of 
his office. Of these the more important were : lack of hos- 
pitality, covetousness, collecting illegal taxes and tolls from 
his clergy, uncharitableness towards his neighbors, the sav- 
ing of money out of episcopal property for his children, 
the taking of large fines, the selling of advowsons, the cut- 
ting down of woods, and the making of all manner of 
illegal leases.^^ The fact that these accusations were greatly 
exaggerated, if not wholly untrue, illustrates the ease with 
which courtiers could despoil the Church and the certainty 
with which they counted upon the Queen's support. To 
allegations of maintaining poor hospitality Elizabeth 
always listened favorably, for she hated the illiberality of 
the clergy as much as their marriages. 

The impropriation" of the benefices opened a wide field 
for this species of preying upon Church lands. It was 
customary for a lay patron to compound with a clergyman 
for a certain portion of the revenue of the benefice to which 
he was about to appoint him. Even bishops had to pay 
large subsidies out of their revenues to royal favorites.'^^ 

^ Strype, Annals^ II, pt. 2, pp. 570-95. 

^ The act of granting ecclesiastical property or revenues to laymen. 

^ The see of Winchester was the second richest in the kingdom. In 
1583 its income was £2800, of which the queen received £1900 in first- 
fruits, subsidies, tenths, and benevolences. £318 additional went to 
courtiers in the form of annuities. When the bishop had paid salaries 
and alms to the poor, he found little left to keep up his position. 
(Campbell, I, pp. 456-7.) 



10 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Not only were Church livings bought and sold continually, 
but the very advowsons-* were subject to the same species 
of corruption. "Besides the impropriations of benefices, 
there are also advowsons, by which, while the place is yet 
occupied, the next vacancies of the livings are gratuitously 
presented to others by the patrons, or else sold by them at 
a price ag;?eed upon."-^^ The extreme prevalance of this 
abuse is illustrated by two cases which came under the juris- 
diction of the Bishop of Norwich in 1571, both of which 
concerned statesmen whose integrity few people doubted. 
Nicolas Bacon had granted an advowson to a kinsman, 
John Bacon. The latter kept the benefice vacant for half 
a year, leaving its congregation without a clergyman, in 
order "to make the better bargain for himself with him 
who should get the presentation; that is, who should bid 
most".^^ The other case concerned an advowson of the 
Earl of Sussex, which "was passed to and fro, from one 
person to another ".^^ The bishop finally felt compelled 
to call the attention of the patrons to these proceedings, 
and Sussex, at least, attempted to foist the charge of simony 
upon the former. 

The extent to which the corrupt practices of royalty had 
preyed upon Church property is curiously illustrated in 
Strype's account of the houses or inns in London which 
once belonged to the various sees. Originally each 
bishopric possessed one of these for the accommodation of 
its prelate when he came to Court or to Convocation. "But 
now (1572) there was scarce one (except the Bishop of 
Ely) ^8 had any, but what he borrowed or hired, their 

** The right of presentation, present or future. 
=" Zurich Letters, 2nd s., p. 360. 
^"Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 172-3. 
" Ibid. 

^He was soon forced to part with Ely-palace in Holborn to Sir 
Christopher Hatton. 



POLICY OF ELIZABETH 11 

houses having been, either by the latter kings and princes, 
or the importunity of courtiers, obtained from them."-* 
Although many of these deprivations occurred before 
Elizabeth came to the throne, it never appears that she was 
backward in such practices. In 1573 Pilkington, the 
Puritan Bishop of Durham, obtained after long efforts cer- 
tain lands in Yorkshire belonging to his bishopric which 
had been unlawfully detained. In return for the affected 
graciousness of the Queen in granting his suit, however, he 
had to pay her the enormous yearly rent of £1020 on these 
lands. ' ' But how these lands of this wealthy bishopric were 
looked upon with an envious and greedy eye . . . may 
appear from the large and long leases made by bishop 
Pilkington ... to the queen, for the gratifying of some 
gentlemen. ' '^^ By the terms of a statute passed in the first 
year of her reign the Queen alone was allowed to make 
leases of property belonging to corporations for a term of 
more than twenty-one years or three lives,^^ and in this way 
she could make more beneficial leases than her subjects. 
There were other devices of a questionable nature, how- 
ever, to which she could resort in order to extract money 
from the Church. Of these the most notorious and the 
most profitable was to keep a bishopric vacant after the de- 
cease of its last incumbent, a situation in which its revenues 
reverted to the Crown. After the death of Bishop Cox in 
1581 the see of Ely remained vacant for eighteen years.^- 
Por the same period the Queen withheld the bishopric of 
Coventry and Lichfield from presentation.^^ On the death 
of Archbishop Parker (1575) a catalogue entitled A note, 
Jioiv the bishoprics in England may be transferred without 

^ Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 358-9. 

»» Ibid., p. 441. 

^ Hallam, Constitutional History of England, I, p. 244. 

*^ Harington, II, p. 108. 

*^ Ibid., p. 117. Examples of this practice might be multiplied. 



12 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

any just cause of much offence to the hishops is said hy 
Strype to have been presented to Burghley;^* more prob- 
ably that nobleman drew it up himself in accordance with 
his usual methodical habits. In this document a plan was 
proposed to transfer each bishop from a less wealthy to a 
richer see. The Queen would receive a large number of 
first fruits, and the bishops might be reasonably satisfied 
by the acquisition of larger incomes. This scheme, more- 
over, advocated the keeping vacant of the bishoprics of 
Chester and Kochester. 

To the Universities Elizabeth acted in a no less arbitrary 
manner. Peremptory orders to the Heads and fellows of 
colleges she constantly despatched, bidding them prefer 
certain individuals. In 1578 a summary order came to the 
Master and fellows of Queens' College, Cambridge, com- 
manding them to admit some Welshman to a fellowship, a 
proceeding unlawful under one of their statutes, ' ' for that 
her Majesty may dispence with all such statutes ".^^ To 
the authorities of Trinity Hall a similar message arrived 
soon afterwards.^^ Such proceedings as these, however, 
became matters of course.^'^ The extent to which the Uni- 
versities were subjected to the corrupt practices of the 
Court may be judged from the fact that the Queen, on the 
advice of Burghley, refused her assent to a bill passed in 
the Parliament of 1575 ' ' for maintenance of Colledges, and 
against buying and selling of rooms and places in Schools ' '.^^ 

Another abuse which caused great trouble to the clergy 
and to the colleges, and which long received the secret 
sanction of the Queen, arose from the commissions ap- 
pointed to search out "concealed" or "suppressed" lands. 

^Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 575-6. 

^'Acts of the Privy Council, 1575-77, p. 161, 

^ Ibid., 1577-78, p. 125. 

*' Mullinger, II, p. 71. 

^ D 'Ewes, Journal of the House of Commons, p. 252. 



POLICY OF ELIZABETH 13 

Strype's description of the whole subject is expressive :^^ 
"When monasteries were dissolved, and the lands thereof, 
and afterwards colleges, etc. were all given to the crown, 
some demeans here and there pertaining thereunto were 
still privily retained and possessed by certain private per- 
sons, or corporations, or churches. This caused the queen 
... to grant commissions to some persons to search after 
these concealments, and to retrieve them to the crown. But 
it was a world to consider what unjust oppressions of the 
people and the poor this occasioned by some griping men" 
. . . who unlawfully ' ' did intermeddle and challenge lands 
of long times possessed by church wardens, etc. . . . and 
certain stocks of money, plate, cattle," etc. "They made 
pretense to the bells, lead," etc., belonging to churches, and 
"further they attempted to make titles to lands, posses- 
sions, plate and goods belonging to hospitals and such like 
places." On February 13, 1572, the Queen issued a proc- 
lamation which revoked all these commissions on account 
of the frauds which they had fostered. This act, how- 
ever, did not put a stop to them, for we find that the 
bishopric of Norwich lost nearly all its revenues through 
the doings of these "concealment" commissioners, and it 
was necessary for the Parliament of 1597 to pass a law for 
the restitution of its property.**' 

If such were the conditions which prevailed among the 
prelates, subjected as they were to the greediness of the 
Court, it is not strange to find a miserable state of affairs 
in existence among the lower clergy. Of the "9400 per- 
sons holding cures of souls in various forms", less than 
two hundred of whom ' ' refused to the last to comply ' ' with 
the statutes of Elizabeth 's first Parliament and were accord- 
ingly deprived of their livings, many began later to fall 
away from conformity.*^ Especially was this true in the 

^^ Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 510-11. 
*° Ibid., p. 312. 
^Froude, VII, p. 90. 



14 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

north, where many of the benefice-holders, who with little 
attempt at secrecy professed the older religion, were sup- 
ported by powerful Catholic noblemen. The Earl of Sus- 
sex, writing in 1562 to Cecil, complains that "the people 
without discipline, utterly devoid of religion, come to divine 
service as to a May-game ; the ministers, for disability and 
greediness, be had in contempt ; and the wise fear more the 
impiety of the licentious professors than the superstition 
of the erroneous Papists ".^^ The wretched condition of the 
parish churches was notorious. ' ' In 1561 there were in the 
Archdeaconry of Norwich eighty parishes where there was 
no resident incumbent; in the Archdeaconry of Norfolk, 
a hundred and eighty parishes; in the Archdeaconry of 
Suffolk a hundred and thirty parishes were almost or en- 
tirely in the same condition. ... In most of them the 
voices of the priests were silent in the desolate aisles. The 
children grew up unbaptized," and the dead were buried 
without the services of a minister.'*^ The following account 
of the Disorders in the Diocese of Chichester, Decemher, 
1569 is typical of the sees which were not in the imme- 
diate vicinity of London. "In many churches they have 
no sermons, not one in seven years, and some not one in 
twelve years, as the parishes have declared to the preachers 
that lately came thither to preach. Few churches have 
their quarter sermons according to the Queen Majesty's 
injunctions. " Then follows an enumeration of the "Popish 
practices" in various churches, the circulation of Popish 
books, the preservation of images, chalices, and other 
Catholic ornaments. "In many places the people cannot 
yet say their commandments, and in some not the articles 
of their belief. In the Cathedral Church of Chichester 

*^ Irish MSS., Bolls House, Sussex to Cecil, July 22, 1562, dated at 
Chester; quoted by Froude, "VII, p. 479. 
« Froude, VII, p. 417. 



POLICY OF ELIZABETH 15 

there be very few preachers resident — of thirty-one pre- 
bendaries scarcely four or five. ' '** 

The ignorance of the clergy at large and their inability to 
preach was another reproach to the Church of which the 
Puritans never ceased to complain. If we except those 
who were Puritanically inclined, few parish-clergymen 
possessed learning enough to compose sermons. This de- 
ficiency arose from the loose manner in which unqualified 
men gained entrance into the Church through corrupt prac- 
tices. To remedy the evil scholars composed books for the 
assistance of these ignorant ministers. In 1569 a book 
entitled A Postil, or an exposition of the gospels that are 
usually read in the churches of God upon Sundays and 
feast-days of saints was translated from the Danish by 
Arthur Golding.*^ ''These postils, which were practical 
sermons upon the epistles and gospels . . . were now of 
very good use, for the help of the unlearned clergy in the 
countries about; who skilled not to compose discreet and 
profitable discourses to be preached to their people for their 
edification."**' This ignorance of the lower clergy the 
bishops attempted to overcome "in requiring competent 
learning, and study at one of the universities, in those that 
hereafter were to be admitted into the ministry ; as well as 
for their morals".*^ Accordingly, we find the Bishop of 
Norwich (1573) refusing to admit into a living an old 
husbandman, who had been preferred by an influential 
country gentleman.*® Action of this kind, however, was 
unusual. In 1585 Burghley could write that "in many 
places the people have no services at all, but are driven to 
resort to other churches ; or else they choose some one that 

** MSB. Domestic, printed in Froude, IX, pp. 512-3. 

" The translator of Ovid. 

*^ Strype, Annals, I, pt. 2, p. 304. 

" Ibid., II, pt. 1, p. 429. 

« Ibid., pp. 429-30. 



16 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

can read meanly, and that office lighteth upon base con- 
ditioned men of occupation, as a tailor, a shoemaker, a 
smith or such like".*^ At a time when "it was the custom 
of . . . patrons to bestow advowsons of benefices upon 
their 'bakers, butlers, cookes, good archers, falconers, and 
horsekeepers' ",^'' and when the greatest immorality among 
the parish-clergy was rife, efforts to ameliorate the intel- 
lectual and moral conditions of the great majority of min- 
isters accomplished little. 

The determined efforts which arose on the part of the 
Puritans to change this policy of Elizabeth and to purify 
the condition of the Church will be discussed in what 
follows. 

(2) The Puritans and their Relation to the Ecclesiastical 
Policy of Elizabeth. 

In order to comprehend the true intent of Spenser's 
ecclesiastical satire it is necessary to know something about 
the religious and political opinions of the Puritans and 
their attitude towards Elizabeth 's Church policy. Although 
the presence of men who held the ultra-Protestant views 
of Calvin had been recognized in Church and State since 
Elizabeth's accession, it was not until 1563 or thereabouts 
that the word Puritan came into use.^^ It was applied to 
those who professed the religio purissima, who wished 
to restore the Church to its original purity in the time of 
the Apostles. In doctrine no difference existed between 
Anglican and Puritan f^ each accepted the Reformed opin- 

*^MSS. Domestic, November 28, 1585. 

*" N. Drake, ShaTcespeare and His Times, pp. 44-5. He quotes from 
Holinshecl and the Talbot Papers. 

"Fuller, Church History (bk. ix), IV, pp. 327-8. 

°- Throughout this chapter I use the words Anglican and Puritan in 
the broad sense in which they were understood in Elizabeth's time. 
The Anglican was the upholder of the government's Church policy, 
the Puritan its opponent. The Puritan considered the Anglican half 
a Catholic on questions of Church government at any rate. 



THE PURITANS AND ELIZABETH 17 

ions of Calvin. The question of Church discipline marked 
the dividing line. The Puritan believed that the scrip- 
tures afforded an accurate pattern in matters of gov- 
ernment as well as in matters of faith, while the Angli- 
can "maintained that the practice of the primitive Church 
for the first four or five centuries was a proper standard 
of . . . discipline ".^^ The Anglican therefore "pared off 
only the later corruptions of the papacy",^* otherwise 
acknowledging the authority of the Catholic Church in 
earlier times, while the Puritan believed in "the authority 
of reason" and would retain nothing in the Church which 
savored of "Popery". 

During the first twenty years of Elizabeth's reign the 
word Puritan came to have a wide application. From the 
violent partisan who fulminated curses at the "Pope of 
Lambeth" to the tried and trusted Privy Councillor of 
upright life its significance extended. Chief among those 
prominent in the State who favored the Puritans for per- 
sonal convictions or political reasons, and who gradually 
came to be recognized as their patrons, were the Earls of 
Huntingdon, Leicester, Warwick, and Bedford, the first 
Earl of Essex,^^ and the second Earl of Pembroke,^® Lord 
Hunsdon, the Queen's cousin, Sir Nicolas Bacon, the Lord 
Keeper, Sir Francis Knollys, Sir Ralph Sadler, Sir Francis 
Walsingham, Sir Walter Mildmay, and Sir Henry Sidney.^'^ 
Among the Church dignitaries, many openly entertained 
Puritan views on some questions; chief among these were 
James Pilkington, Bishop of Durham, and his brother 
John, Archdeacon of the same, John Parkhurst, Bishop of 

" Neal, History of the Puritans, I, p. 79. 
"7&id. 

"'The father of Elizabeth's favorite. 
"The husband of Mary Sidney. 

" All these men were members of the Privy Council at one time or 
another during the period 1570-80. 
3 



18 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Norwich, Whittingham and Hutton, successive Deans of 
Durham, Grindal, eventually Archbishop of Canterbury, 
and Sandys, successively Bishop of Worcester, London, and 
Archbishop of York. These ecclesiasts had imbibed Cal- 
vinistic principles from the Swiss divines during their 
exile in Mary's reign. In the lives and views of all these 
men, however, paradoxes appear at every step. Leicester, 
who with the connivance of Sidney, his brother-in-law, had 
once proposed to Philip of Spain to re-establish the Catholic 
religion provided the latter would sanction his marriage 
with the Queen, and whose habits of life were dissolute, 
became a leader of those violently opposed to Catholicism 
and loose morals. Huntingdon, whose claim to the suc- 
cession the Puritans advocated, was the nephew of Cardinal 
Pole. The austere Earl of Bedford married his daughter 
Anne to the Catholic Clifford, Earl of Cumberland. Grin- 
dal, whom Archbishop Parker considered unduly favor- 
able to the Puritans in the capacity of Bishop of London,'* 
strongly recommended in 1573 that Reforming clergymen 
of a radical bias should not hold preferments,^^ and on one 
occasion at least advocated the torture of religious prison- 
ers.®^ The same name was applied to men whose views 
ranged from one political or moral extreme to the other. 
To the heated controversialist men like Grindal appeared 
persecutors of their brethren ; to the orthodox Anglican he 
seemed a favorer of the government's opponents."^ It is 
expedient, therefore, to remember that the word Puritan 
was capable of the broadest signification in Elizabeth 's time. 
The proceedings of Archbishop Parker and his col- 
leagues, who much against their will had been compelled to 

^ Strype, Grindal, pp. 154, 234; Life of Parker, I, pp. 420, 547. 

^' Strype, ParTcer, II, p. 241. 

«« Froude, VII, p. 429. 

*" Marsden, Early Puritans, p. 122. 



THE PURITANS AND ELIZABETH 19 

enforce the Act of Uniformity, emphasized the first split 
between Puritan and Anglican. The particular point 
which caused the break was the objection of the Puritans 
to the wearing of the surplice and the cap in the conduct 
of divine service, and from this fact the proceedings which 
followed were styled the "vestment controversy". The 
Puritan's dislike of the "habits" is typical of the light in 
which he regarded the Established Church. "He thought 
to see" returning in the train of these garments "the 
gorgeous vestments, the lighted candles, the uplifted host, 
and the whole of that elaborate ritual which in his mind 
and in his experience stood identified in turn with Roman 
superstition and priestly tyranny, — the intellect prostrate 
at the confessional, morality disregarded in minute atten- 
tion to ceremonial, and the spiritual light within burning 
only yet more dimly as the tapers on the altar multiplied 
and blazed with more dazzling brightness. ' '^- 

In the spirit of this point of view, which regarded the 
Anglican Church as only one step removed from the 
Catholic, the Puritan ministers refused to obey the injunc- 
tions of the bishops. Of more than one hundred ministers 
in London who were summoned before the Ecclesiastical 
Commission, thirty-seven, and these the best preachers in 
the city, declined to wear the vestments, and were there- 
fore suspended from the performance of their duties for 
three months.^^ Riots followed in the city, and Parker, 
according to his own account,^* bore the brunt of the anger 
of the populace. The men, however, who were regarded 
as the leaders of the Puritans in this struggle were two 
Oxford divines, — Thomas Sampson, Dean of Christ Church, 
and Lawrence Humphrey, President of Magdalen College. 
Upon their refusal to conform the Commission deprived 

« Mullinger, II, pp. 195-6, 
^Froude, VIII, p. 142. 
" Correspondence J p. 237. 



20 Spenser's "shepherd's calender" 

Sampson of his deanery and confined him to a moderate 
kind of imprisonment at ''the Queen's special command- 
ment".''^ Humphrey, after remaining under surveillance 
for a time, was allowed to return to Oxford. Other promi- 
nent non-conformists summoned before the Commission 
were John Fox, the martyrologist, and Miles Coverdale, 
the translator of the Bible and Bishop of Exeter under 
Edward VI. Fox was allowed to retain his small prebend 
in Salisbury Cathedral, but Coverdale lost his preferment 
in a London church. This controversy, however, continued 
through the correspondence of the bishops and the non- 
conformists with the Swiss divines, Bullinger, Gualter, and 
Beza. Although each side openly claimed their support, it 
is a curious fact that even several of the bishops who ap- 
pealed to their decision expressed scruples concerning the 
use of the vestments.^® In the University of Cambridge, 
at all times during Elizabeth's reign a hot-bed of Puri- 
tanism, this controversy is further reflected by the break- 
ing of painted windows,^'^ by objections to the habits even 
on the part of the masters of colleges, and by open demon- 
strations against the ritual of the Established Church.^* 
And, finally, the aftermath of these ecclesiastical dissen- 
sions may be seen in the publication (1566) by the deprived 
London ministers of a treatise entitled A brief discourse 
against the outward apparel and ministering garments of 
the popish church,^^ and also in the formation of Puritan 
conventicles for liberty of worship.'^*^ 

The second act in the religious drama took place in 

*^Strype, ParJcer, 1, p. 371, 

^ Bishops Home, Jewel, Pilkington, Sandys, Guest, and Grindal 
expressed objections to the habits at one time or another (Neal, I, 
p. 93). 

" The Puritans considered these superstitious. 

^ Mullinger, I, pp. 196-9. 

*» Strype, Ajinals, I, pt. 2, pp. 163 ff. 

'» Neal, I, p. 104. 



THE PURITANS AND ELIZABETH 21 

Cambridge; its protagonist was Thomas Cartwright, a 
senior fellow of Trinity, who had been appointed Margaret 
professor of divinity in 1569. From this chair he proceeded 
to denounce what seemed to him the corruptions inherent in 
the Anglican Church. "The points especially animad- 
verted upon by Cartwright were, however, those dis- 
tinctively characteristic of the English Church when com- 
pared with the other Protestant Churches, — the institution 
of archbishops and bishops, of archdeacons and deacons; 
the appointment of preachers without any settled charge; 
and the practice of appointing those who were selected to 
minister to certain congregations without admitting the 
congregation to a voice in the election. "^^ It was no 
longer a question of vestments merely; to Cartwright 's 
opponents he seemed to be " assaulting the hierarchy of the 
church ".^^ Various members of his party, particularly 
Robert Some and Edmund Chapman, followed his example, 
attacking pluralities, non-residence, and the ecclesiastical 
courts." On June 11, 1569, Dr. William Chaderton, the 
President of Queens' College, despatched a letter to Cecil 
in which he complained that "suche seditions, contention, 
and disquietude, such errors and schismes openlie taught 
and preached, boldlie and without warant are latelie 
growne amongst us, that the good estate, quietnes, and 
governance . . . not of Cambridge alone but of the whole 
church and realme, are for great hazarde unles severlie by 
authoritie they be punished".'^* On June 24 Cecil received 
a letter from Grindal, recently installed as Archbishop of 
York, who strongly denounced the "love of contention and 
liking of novelties" with which he heard that Cartwright 

" Mullinger, I, p. 207. 
" Strype, Annals, I, pt. 2, pp. 372 ff. 
'* Ibid. 

'* State Papers, Bom., Elis., LXXI, no. 11, quoted by Mullinger, I, 
p. 215. 



22 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

had disturbed the University, and advocated his expulsion 
unless he conformedJ^ A correspondence then ensued be- 
tween Cecil and the University authorities, and a letter of 
the former assuring the Vice-Chancellor of his support 
was read before the congregation convened on June 29. 
Although Cartwright's party, who numbered a large ma- 
jority at this meeting, used their powers to veto the ap- 
pointment to the caput, or governing board, of those whom 
they disliked, the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. John May, refused 
to admit Cartwright himself to the degree of doctor of 
divinity, "for which his supplicat was on that day . . . 
presented to the senate".^® His conduct aroused the resent- 
ment of Cartwright's party, and both sides appealed to 
Cecil, the Chancellor. An elegant Latin letter from Cart- 
wright, in which he stated that in his lectures he had com- 
mented upon nothing "which did not naturally arise from 
the text", caused Cecil to bid the authorities investigate 
the matter more thoroughly. This order, however, really 
sanctioned their proceedings. Cartwright's suspension 
from the duties of his lectureship followed, and on Decem- 
ber 11, after the promulgation of the new statutes which 
greatly augmented the powers of the Anglican authorities, 
the Vice-Chancellor, Whitgift, Cartwright's principal op- 
ponent throughout this struggle, deprived him of his pro- 
fessorship. In September, 1571, Whitgift as Master of 
Trinity expelled Cartwright from his fellowship in that 
college on the ground that he had not taken priest's 
orders. "There is no doubt . . . that the proceeding, at 
the time, was regarded as harsh and arbitrary, and did 
much to render Whitgift unpopular in the college, for the 
statutory requirement was one which amid the religious 

'° Grindal, Remains, pp. 323-4. This letter is typical of the religi- 
ous controversies of the age, showing that an ecclesiast might enter- 
tain Puritan views on one subject and not on another. 

"Mullinger, I, p. 218. 



THE PURITANS AND ELIZABETH 23 

excitement and doubt that then prevailed few masters of 
colleges found it expedient or possible to enforce. ' ''^^ After 
a fruitless remonstrance Cartwright left Cambridge and 
repaired to Geneva. 

The struggle between Whitgift and Cartwright, which 
had assumed a national importance, did not end here. In 
the next year a book appeared entitled An Admo7iition to 
the Parliament, popularly supposed to have been the work 
of Cartwright, but really composed by Field and Wil- 
cox, two Puritan divines of London.'^ This treatise de- 
nounced the bishops and the Anglican Church in the 
strongest terms. The former they stigmatised as "lordly 
Lords . . . whose kingdom must down, hold they never so 
hard : because their tyrannous Lordships cannot stand with 
Christ his kingdom". The state of the Church they called 
"the reign of Antichrist".''* For presenting this treatise 
to the Parliament Field and Wilcox were committed to 
Newgate, October 2, 1572.^^ Cartwright, at the urgent 
solicitation of his friends, now returned to England, and 
took up the cudgels by writing A Second Admonition to the 
Parliament. His language was no less vigorous than that 
of the authors of the first Admonition. He attacked the 
"Popish abuses yet remaining" in the Church of Eng- 
land, and denounced the bishops as a "remnant of Anti- 
christ 's brood ' '.^^ The Anglican dignitaries, who called the 
Puritans "precisians" and "disciplinarians", and often 
classed them with Anabaptists, atheists, and Libertines,®^ 
considered some activity necessary on their side, and ac- 

" Ibid., p. 227. 

" Neal, I, p. 121. 

" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 476 f.; Life of Whitgift, I, pp. diff. 

*»Neal, ibid. 

*' Strype, Whitgift, I, p. 57. 

'- A religious sect of the time. 

»= Neal, I, p. 123. 



24 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

cordingly Whitgift was chosen to reply. His Answer to 
the Admonition appeared this same year, in which he 
attempted to defend the Church against the allegations of 
the Puritans. To this Cartwright addressed a Reply, 
against which Whitgift returned with a Defense of his 
Answer. Cartwright, however, had the last word; he 
issued a lengthy Second Reply, the last part of which 
did not appear until 1577, after he had again retired to the 
Continent. 

The contentions of Cartwright are typical of the objec- 
tions of the Puritans to the Anglican Church in the period 
previous to the Marprelate controversy. He maintained 
' ' that the Holy Scriptures were not only a standard of doc- 
trine, but of discipline and government; and that the 
Church of Christ, in all ages, was to be regulated by them ' '. 
His anger was almost entirely directed at the bishops, not 
at the Queen and her advisers who regulated the policy of 
the Church. It is curious to notice that the corruptions 
which he so bitterly denounced related almost entirely to 
matters of ceremony and regiment, while the more reprehen- 
sible abuses to which the clergy were subjected, such as the 
simoniacal practices of lay patrons and the fleecing of 
Church property by the courtiers, received only a passing 
notice. The chief matters in the Church which Cartwright 
and the Puritans disliked were as follows : the whole order 
of ecclesiastical precedence, archbishops, bishops, arch- 
deacons, deans, chapters, chancellors, commissaries, and 
other officials; the authority of the Church to ordain 
matters not expressly commanded by scripture ; the appoint- 
ment of ministers by bishops, lay patrons, and the Crown ; 
the appointment of ministers without a special pastoral 
charge ; the non-residence of ministers and their holding of 
a plurality of benefices ; the appointment of ministers who 
could read only and not preach ; the use of the clerical vest- 



THE PURITANS AND ELIZABETH 25 

ments ; the use of the Communion Book ; the observation of 
holy-days and remembrance of saints; the cathedral mode 
of worship accompanied with chanting of prayers and music 
of organs; certain rites and ceremonies relating to com- 
munion, marriage, burial, baptism, purification of women, 
confirmation, and many others, which were inveighed 
against with a bitterness which now seems entirely dispro- 
portionate to their importance.®* 

In these treatises, and in all the writings of the Puritans 
of this period, it is necessary to emphasize two features 
which are of the greatest importance in order to understand 
rightly Spenser's ecclesiastical satire. The first is that 
Cartwright and the Puritans not only affirmed that the 
Anglican Church differed little or not at all from the Catho- 
lic in many points, but that they constantly spoke of the 
Anglicans as if they were Catholics. Parker became the 
"Pope of Lambeth", and the bishops ''that viperous 
brood" of prelates, "imps of Antichrist", "smelling too 
much of Antichrist's stench"; the Cathedral churches they 
designated "dens of loitering lubbers"; the regiment of 
the Church they called " Antichristian and devilish", and 
they said that they might "as safely subscribe to allow the 
dominion of the Pope"; the Book of Common Prayer they 
compared to the "Popish dung-hill, the mass-book, full of 
all abominations". Examples might be indefinitely multi- 
plied. The second feature concerns the controversial lan- 
guage of the Puritans, which constantly assumes a pastoral 
guise in imitation of the rhetorical figures of Ezekiel 
(chapter 34) and of the parables of Christ. The following 
are good illustrations in this kind : 

" And methinketh you should not have been ignorant of this, 
that, although there be tares in the flour of the church which are 

** This list is given, because it will be subsequently seen that 
Spenser under a pastoral coloring alludes to some of these abuses. 



26 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

like the wheat, and therefore, being ground, easily meeteth together 
in the loaf, yet there are no acorns which are bread for swine: 
and, although there be goats amongst the flock of the church, 
because they have some likelihood with the sheep, feeding as they 
do, giving milk as they do, yet in the church of Christ there are 
no swine, nor hogs. It pertaineth to God only to sever the tares 
from the wheat, and the goats from the sheep; but the churches 
can discern between wheat and acorns, between swine and sheep." 
( Cartwright's Reply) 

" And you see that, if I would follow those noble metaphors 
of watchman and shepherd, which the scripture useth to express 
the office of a minister with, what a large field is opened unto me. 
For then I could shew you how that cities besieged, and flocks in 
danger of wolves, are watched continually night and day; and 
that there is no city so sore and so continually besieged, nor no 
flocks subject to so manifold diseases at home, or hurtful and 
devouring beasts abroad ... as are the churches, the shepherds 
and watchmen whereof are pastors or bishops." (The same) 

" Upon all which things I conclude that the residence of the 
pastor is necessary; and to doubt whether the pastor ought to be 
resident amongst his flock is to doubt whether the watchman 
should be in his tower ... or the shepherd amongst his flock, 
especially where the sheep are continually in danger of wolves." 
(The same) 

These quotations are merely examples of the prevailing 
use of pastoral language in theological disputes. Surely 
the young Spenser, who probably heard this kind of lan- 
guage every day of his life in Cambridge, must have enjoyed 
ample opportunity to observe the adaptability of pastoral 
language to the purposes of ecclesiastical satire. 

The third step in the struggle between the Puritans and 
Elizabeth's government is their attempt to reform the 
Church from within. Cartwright and his brethren, many 
of whom had been deprived of their livings, had assailed 
the corruptions of the Church from without; it remained 
to see if conforming Puritans, who held scarcely less radical 



THE PURITANS AND ELIZABETH 27 

views, could improve its internal conditions. Accordingly, 
about the year 1571, the conforming Puritans set about the 
institution of certain exercises, called " prophesyings ", 
which received the approval of several bishops. The in- 
struction of the lower clergy in the composition of sermons 
and in the art of preaching was the avowed object of these 
proceedings. "The exercise was, that certain ministers 
within a convenient compass in the diocese assembled in a 
parish church . . . and there, one after another, gave their 
judgments briefly of the sense and import of some place or 
places of scripture, propounded before to be discussed, 
either by the bishop 's or the archdeacon 's order , . . : and 
then lastly it was determined by a moderator. By which 
means, the ministers were obliged to study, to prepare for 
the better acquitting themselves in these exercises: and 
their knowledge in scripture increased ; and the people also 
present were edified, by hearing of a sermon then 
preached. ' '^^ 

The institution of these exercises began in the church of 
Northampton and received the consent of Scambler, Bishop 
of Peterborough, of the mayor of the town, and of the 
justice of the peace.^^ In 1573 they were established at 
Bury St. Edmund's in Suffolk with the approbation of 
Parkhurst, Bishop of Norwich,^^ and rapidly spread 
throughout other parts of this diocese. In 1574 Cooper, 
Bishop of Lincoln, drew up instructions for the regulation 
of the "prophesyings" in that part of his diocese which lay 
in Hertfordshire.^^ In fact they were instituted in many 
dioceses, of which these were the principal ones.^^ Now the 
Puritan ministers, according to the government, "took 

'^ Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, p. 325. 

^ Ibid., p. 133. 

"" Ibid., p. 326. 

"" Ibid., pp. 472-6. 

''"Ibid; Strype, Parker, II, p. 358. 



28 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

occasion here to vent controversies concerning matters of 
church discipline, and to call in question the establishment 
of this Church by episcopacy ".^° The Queen, therefore, 
who could never bring herself to regard free speech in 
Parliament or in the pulpit as anything else than imperti- 
nence, commanded Archbishop Parker to suppress these 
"vain prophesyings" in the diocese of Norwich. To this 
order Bishop Parkhurst, who considered them "a right 
necessary exercise", demurred, and at the same time a 
letter arrived which tended to confirm him in his decision. 
This paper, signed by Sir Thomas Smith, Sir "Walter Mild- 
may, Sir Francis Knolly, and Sandys, Bishop of London, 
strongly recommended the continuance of the "prophesy- 
ings"."^ When Parker got wind of this proceeding, he 
wrote to Parkhurst again, asking what warrant these Privy 
Councillors and the Bishop of London had for their letter. 
The latter, therefore, although he communicated with 
Sandys, deemed it best to comply with the royal command, 
and issued an order for the suppression of the exercises. 

Grindal, who had been confirmed as Archbishop of 
Canterbury on February 15, 1575-6, strongly favored the 
' ' prophesyings ' '. In spite of their repression in the diocese 
of Norwich they continued elsewhere, and Grindal drew up 
fresh directions for their regulation.''^ This proceeding he 
considered necessary, because the more violent Puritans 
continued to make "invections against the laws, rites, 
policies, and discipline of the Church of England". The 
Queen, however, who thought that ' ' three or four preachers 
might suffice for a county", ordered Grindal to put down 
these exercises, and to this command he wrote a firm, 
dignified reply in which he refused to obey.''^ After point- 

^ Strype, Parker, II, p. 359. 

"^Ibid., pp. 359-61. 

'^Strype, Grindal, pp. 326-8. 

^ The date of this letter was probably December 8, 1576 {cf. Cooper^ 
AtJienae, I, p, 474). 



THE PURITANS AND ELIZABETH 29 

ing out that the ''prophesyings" derived their authority 
from the New Testament, that they improved the moral 
and intellectual conditions of the clergy, and that the bare 
reading of the homilies did not suffice for the edification of 
the congregation, he proceeded to ask the Queen to refer 
"all these ecclesiastical matters which touch religion . . . 
unto the bishops" and to "pronounce" less "resolutely 
and peremptorily" when she dealt "in matters of faith 
and religion". Her high-handed method of procedure he 
compared to "the anti-christian voice of the pope". He 
further warned her that she was but "a mortal creature", 
and bade her humble herself before God.'** Now these were 
bold words. This letter incensed the Queen ; on the 8th of 
May, 1576, she issued an order to every bishop in England, 
charging each one to put down the " prophesyings " within 
his own diocese. The tenor of this document conclusively 
proves that the Queen and her advisers looked upon them 
as Puritan devices to disturb the peace of the Church.''^ 
In the beginning of June the Privy Council confined 
Grindal to his house and sequestered him from performing 
the duties of his see for six months. Although he wrote a 
submission on November 30, 1577, it was not considered 
satisfactory, and his suspension was not removed until the 
close of 1582. 

In these three movements, the "vestment controversy", 
the Cartwright-Whitgift struggle, and the proceedings 
relating to the "prophesyings", the wide application of the 
word Puritan and the relation of the Puritans to the policy 
of Elizabeth's government are clearly illustrated. Before 
taking up Spenser's satire on Church and State, however, 
it is expedient to consider what was going on in Cambridge 
during the period of his connection with the University, 

" Grindal, Eemains, pp. 376-90. 
"^Strype, Grindal, pp. 574-6. 



30 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

and how his political opinions may have been colored, like 
those of many another Englishman, by the stormy scenes 
which were being enacted under his eyes. 

(3) Academic Disputes in Cambridge {1569-1576) 

In view of Spenser's connection with the University of 
Cambridge from May 20, 1569, until June 26, 1576, when 
he left upon the taking of his Master's degree, it will be 
well to recapitulate the main events of academic interest 
during this period illustrative of the religious contro- 
versies of the age. Next to London this University was, at 
this time, the chief centre of Puritan agitation, and, in view 
of the fact that its Chancellor was the first statesman of 
the realm, to whom its members constantly submitted their 
causes for judgment, its disputes acquired a national impor- 
tance. The struggle between Cartwright and Whitgift, 
which has already been described in the preceding pages, 
occupied the centre of the academic stage during the first 
two years of Spenser's residence. Like all thoughtful 
young men at Cambridge, he must have been deeply inter- 
ested in its outcome, and, although he may have declined to 
accept the whole of Cartwright 's ecclesiastical program, it 
is impossible to believe that he did not come under the spell 
of this man of genius. Cartwright 's popularity in Cam- 
bridge was unbounded. We are told that "when it was his 
turn to preach at St. Mary's, the sexton, on account of the 
multitudes who flocked to hear him, was obliged, for their 
accommodation, to take down the windows of the church ' ',°® 
that those outside might listen. The eloquence of the Lady 
Margaret Professor, who thought that "the time had come 
to throw off shams, and denounce the intrinsic falsity as 
well as the incidental corruption of the religious machinery 

" Brook, Lives of the Puritans, II, pp. 137-8. 



ACADEMIC DISPUTES 31 

which he saw around him'V^ won over to his side a large 
majority of the members of the University.^^ 

The expulsion of Cartwright, however, failed to allay the 
rising tide of Puritan dissatisfaction with the prevailing 
order of things. On the sixth of May, 1572, a document 
signed by one hundred and sixty-four members of the 
senate — that is, graduate students in residence who were 
either regents or non-regents — and addressed to Burghley, 
petitioned against the new statutes recently promulgated 
by the University authorities.''^ These statutes, which had 
been drawn up chiefly by Whitgift, had received the royal 
assent on September 25, 1570. The decision to reform the 
statutes had been caused by the behavior of the senate on 
June 29, 1570, in which Cartwright 's followers possessed a 
majority and in which they successfully opposed the elec- 
tion to the capuf^^^ of all those Heads of colleges known 
to be hostile to their party. The state of affairs at Cam- 
bridge represented on a smaller scale the state of the Eng- 
lish Church at large; the authorities were mostly Angli- 
cans, those who enjoyed positions of minor importance were 
for the most part Puritans. The large body of voters who 
filled the senate consisted of men who were studying for 
higher degrees, many of whom were fellows of colleges, and 
it was among these younger men that the strength of Cart- 
wright's party lay. Without entering upon all the changes 

" CampbeU, I, p. 413. 

"'Notices of Cartwright 's popularity may be found in many places. 
The following statement well expresses the estimation in which he was 
held: "Cartwright was so generally popular that he would, it was 
believed, have been chosen vice-chancellor, had not statutes altering 
materially the constitution of the university been obtained in Sep- 
tember 1570" (Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 361). Cf. also Mullinger, II, 
p. 230. 

°^ Cooper, Annals, II, p. 279. 

100 rpjjg administrative board of the University. 



32 SPENSER 'S shepherd's CALENDER 

introduced into the statutes, it is enough to remember that 
the new code greatly augmented the powers of the Heads 
and consequently greatly diminished the prestige of the 
Puritan body of voters. They have been characterized as 
"innovations upon the ancient constitution of the Univer- 
sity of the most important and fundamental character ".^°^ 
Among the signers of this petition were four men who 
subsequently became bishops; several other petitioners 
afterwards received important preferments in the Church. 
To this document the Vice-Chancellor and Heads drew up 
an answer, to which the complainants replied, and the 
matter was referred by Burghley to a commission of five 
bishops, who decided at the end of May (1572) that "we 
think that the statutes as they be drawn, male yet stand, 
and no greate cause whie to make anie alteration ".^°^ The 
allegations on each side are characterized by contumelious 
language and testify to the harsh feeling which existed 
between the authorities and those generally classed as 
Puritans.^"* 

The University proctors. Bacon and Purefoy, who had 
assumed a leading part in this altercation probably because 
the powers of their office were greatly diminished by the 
new code, continued the agitation by baiting Dr. Hawford, 
the deputy Vice-Chancellor, and on verbal authority which 
they claimed to have secured from Burghley they prevented 
the nomination of lecturers at the congregation on June 10, 
1572.^*^* This last dispute dragged on throughout the 
summer, and was finally settled in September rather in 

"^Peacockj Observations on the Statutes of Carnbridge University, 
p. 47. 

"* Cooper, Annals, II, p. 304. 

*°* Lancelot Browne, fellow of Pembroke and a University proctor 
in 1573, was one of the four Puritan leaders in this dispute. Spenser 'a 
college was in the thick of the fray. 

^'^ Cooper, Annals, II, pp. 307 ff. 



ACADEMIC DISPUTES 33 

favor of the proctors.^ "^ The unpopularity of the Anglican 
party was further increased this year by the publication of 
Whitgift's Answer to the Admonition, then held to be 
the work of Cartwright.^"^ On the following 3rd of De- 
cember, William Clark, a fellow of Peterhouse, in a 
Clerum sermon preached before the University at St. 
Mary's defended these two theses: "that those states of 
Bishops, Archbishops, Metropolitans, Patriarchs, and lastly 
of Popes, were introduced into the Church by Satan", and 
"that among the Ministers of the Church, one ought not 
to be superior to another "/°^ Summoned before the 
authorities the next day he ' ' spared not ... to overthwart 
divers of the Heads in very unseemly manner, and with 
taunting words ' '. On his refusal to retract his statements, 
he was expelled in February (1573), and, although Burgh- 
ley on his appeal at first wrote in his favor, he subsequently 
upheld the decision of the Heads and confirmed Clark's 
expulsion.^"^ 

The objections to the constituted authorities receive fur- 
ther illustration at this time by the actions of two other 
men, both fellows of Trinity. One of them, John Browning, 
who had ' ' uttered in St. Mary 's certain doctrines, tending 
to the favouring of Novatus's heresy" and touching upon 
"matters of State "j^"" was convened before Whitgift, and 
after subsequently preaching again upon the same subject 
he was committed to the Tolbooth. Eeleased upon heavy 
bonds, he was required to subscribe to a confession before 
Burghley, "affirming that he was much mistaken in his 
sermon ",^^" and orders were given to see whether he should 

^"UUd., pp. 309-10. 
I'^Strype, Whitgift, I, p. 87. 
^"Ibid., p. 88. 

"'Cooper, Annals, II, pp. 312-3. 
™ Strype, Parlcer, II, p. 195. 
"" Cooper, Annals, II, p. 315. 

4 



34 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

live up to this declaration. The case of the other, Nicolas 
Browne, illustrates the danger which Spenser ran even in 
satirizing unlearned priests. This man in a sermon was 
charged with uttering ' ' doctrine and reasons tending to the 
infringing of the order and manner of creating Ministers" 
and with saying that "no Priests made in the Popish time 
ought to have any function in the Church of England ".^^^ 
This latter accusation might have been laid at Spenser's 
door, for he also had attacked "Popish" ministers who 
still held preferment in the Church.^^^ Although Browne 
denied these allegations and therefore at first refused to 
recant, he was forced to make a formal retraction after an 
"ineffectual application" to Burghley. 

In June, 1573, Thomas Aldrich, the Master of Corpus 
Christi (Bene't), a leader of the Puritans and a "great up- 
holder of Cartwright", "refused to take the degree of 
Bachelor in Divinity ",^^^ as required by the statutes in the 
case of a Head of a college, and became involved in a 
struggle with the authorities, who sought the assistance of 
Burghley and Archbiship Parker. In August the Chan- 
cellor summoned Aldrich, who had appealed to him, and 
"charged him with ingratitude to the Archbishop, his 
patron, and ordered him to go to the Archbishop, declare his 
error, and beg his pardon". Aldrich, however, refused, 
and resigned his mastership, thus putting an end to a pro- 
ceeding which caused a great deal of excitement at Cam- 
bridge and elsewhere.^^* 

These troubles were supplemented in October (1573) by 
the preaching of one Millayn, a fellow of Christ's College, 

"' Strype, FarTcer, II, pp. 198-9. 

"''May eclogue and Mother Euiberd's Tale, p. 516 (Globe ed.). 

^"^ Strype, Parker, II, pp. 272 ff. 

"* This trouble about Aldrich is illustrative of the manner in which 
academic events assumed a national importance on account of the 
appeals to the highest authorities in Church and State. 



ACADEMIC DISPUTES 36 

who attacked the orthodox clergy, charging them with 
ignorance, dissolute living, maintenance of the "Pope's 
law ' ' and ' ' idolatry ' ', and other faults. Upon a refusal to 
retract he also was expelled from the University.^^^ "The 
furious and rash zeal" of these times, stimulated by the 
massacre of St. Bartholomew's, had brought about in the 
December of the previous year (1572) proceedings against 
Dr. Caius, the Head and founder of that college which bears 
his name. Unpopular owing to his severity in official ad- 
ministration and owing to a suspected Catholic bias, he 
became the subject of an attack in which Puritans and 
Anglicans joined. It was found that he ' ' retained, stored 
up in the college, a collection of ornaments, books, and 
vestments, such as were used in the celebration of the 
Roman religious service ".^^^ This discovery led to the 
"arbitrary destruction of the whole collection" by the 
authorities, who broke to pieces those ornaments which they 
could not burn. 

At this time the animosities between Puritan and Angli- 
can were fanned into a white heat by the writings of Cart- 
wright and Whitgift, which I have already described. The 
contentions of Cartwright are reflected by other quarrels in 
Cambridge which grew out of the same spirit of opposition 
to authority. In 1574 Dr. Kelk, the Master of Magdalene, 
became involved in a quarrel with the fellows of his college 
over the irregular admission of one of their number, a pro- 
ceeding which required Burghley's adjudication.'^^ The 
protracted quarrel between the Master and fellows of St. 
John's, the most Puritan of all the colleges, resulted in the 
expulsion of the former, Dr. Nicolas Shepperd, who was 

"° Cooper, Annals, II, p. 318 ; Strype, Whitgift, I, pp. 98-100, and 
III, app. xii. 

"' MuIUnger, I, p. 243. 

"' Strype, Whitgift, I, pp. 118-9. 



36 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

charged with various delinquencies by the Puritans. Al- 
though this sentence was confirmed by Bishop Cox, the 
visitor, through whose influence Dr. John Still was ap- 
pointed as Shepperd's successor, July 14, 1574,^^^ the 
trouble continued, "One John Cock," a fellow, " in a 
'commonplace' there delivered, openly assailed the master 
as one, who, while prescribing for others a rigid rule of 
conduct, was himself a glaring example of greed of lucre 
and the love of office.""® Though compelled by Burghley 
to read a recantation, he added certain comments on this 
occasion which "rendered matters even worse than be- 
fore".^-" Another fellow, Maurice Fawkner, "was com- 
mitted to prison . . . for a sermon preached at St. Mary's 
on the 16th of December" (1576), in which he attacked the 
unbrotherly feeling characteristic of the Anglican Heads 
in their dealings with the Puritans.^-^ These and similar 
contentions led to the promulgation of new college statutes 
at St. John's, which went into effect only after Still ceased 
to be master in June, 1577. 

These instances, however, are only the most prominent of 
many troubles which disturbed the University. The hand 
of the fellow was raised against the master. The Anglican 
party, few in number but powerful in authority, was con- 
stantly opposed by the large Puritan majority, whose 
powers had been clipped by the new statutes of 1570. 
Throughout these years of Spenser's residence at Cam- 
bridge, however, many cross-currents were at work, and it 
is not always possible to draw a hard and fast line between 
Puritan and Anglican. Many men who were at first violent 
opponents of the Anglican Church later conformed and 

"' Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 467. 

"» Mullinger, I, p. 265. 

^ Ibid. 

'^ This point of view appears in the May eclogue. 



i 



ACADEMIC DISPUTES 37 

gained high preferment. Dr. John Still, who signed letters 
to Burghley in favor of Cartwright in 1570, received two 
preferments from Archbishop Parker the very next year, 
became Master of St. John's in 1574 and of Trinity in 1577, 
and subsequently in 1593 became Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
Robert Some, who preached so violently against the Angli- 
can Church in 1569,^^- became Vice-President of Queens' 
College in 1572 and, several years later, Master of Peter- 
house. Richard Rowland, who also signed the Cartwright 
letters (1570), preached against the sermons of Millayn in 
October, 1573, and subsequently became Master first of 
Magdalene, then of Trinity, and finally Bishop of Peter- 
borough in 1585. Many of those men who signed the peti- 
tion of 1572 against the new statutes attained to high 
offices in the Church, as I have elsewhere related. Exam- 
ples of such cases might be greatly multiplied. The gen- 
eral theory seems to be that these men lost a good deal of 
their earlier Puritan scrupulousness and accepted prefer- 
ment with the intention of reforming the Church from with- 
in rather than from without. It is unnecessary to believe 
that they disavowed all their former views. On some ques- 
tions they might be considered Anglican, on others Puritan, 
and the acrimony characteristic of the religious contro- 
versies during the years 1565-1580 does not necessarily 
imply that there was a sharp dividing line between members 
of the two parties on all questions of ecclesiastical govern- 
ment. In their correspondence various bishops, such as 
Cox and Home, expressed views which the Puritans advo- 
cated ; Lord Burghley in several of his memoranda pointed 
to the abuses in the Church. "What marked a man as a 
Puritan in the eyes of the government was the open expres- 
sion of these views by word or deed. 

From this view of the contentious surroundings in which 

^ Cf. supra, p. 21. 



38 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Edmund Spenser passed seven years of his youth, and 
which have left their impress upon his first important poem, 
we may safely pass to a few general remarks upon the 
nature of his satire in the February, May, July, and Sep- 
tember eclogues. 

ii. The Political and Ecclesiastical Eclogues op the 
Shepherd's Calender 

(1) Introduction to the Present Theory 

The opening section of this work has attempted to give 
the reader a concise view of the ecclesiastical policy which 
Queen Elizabeth and Lord Burghley pursued, and for 
which the latter was held responsible, together with the 
corruption which it produced in the Church; the two suc- 
ceeding divisions have attempted to present an idea of the 
position taken by the Puritans in regard to this policy and 
in regard to the Anglican Church, and of the particular 
reflection of the national religious controversies in the 
University of Cambridge. In order to comprehend justly 
the true intent of Spenser 's political and ecclesiastical satire 
in the Shepherd's Calender, it is necessary to gain this 
insight into the history of his times and to seek to under- 
stand the point of view from which he regarded contem- 
poraneous public questions. 

The present investigation is the first which has attempted 
to analyze in detail the contents of Spenser's controversial 
eclogues and to give a logical explanation of the allusions 
therein to historical conditions and events. Instead of 
examining them in a purely literary way, and thus arriving 
at haphazard guesses concerning their meaning, I have en- 
deavored to bring out by historical research and especially 
by constant comparisons to the contemporaneous writings 
of the Puritans and others their exact nature as expres- 



ECCLESIASTICAL ECLOGUES 39 

sions of Spenser's political and religious faith. My con- 
clusions tend to prove that Spenser, in the years preceding 
his Irish employment, was an ardent, thorough-going Puri- 
tan of the controversial type, and therefore make him out 
to be more of a radical than his biographers, for supposed 
lack of evidence, have been disposed to believe him. 

Now the February, May, July, and September eclogues, 
as the scope of my previous remarks has tended to show, 
reflect a spirit of opposition to the policy of Elizabeth and 
Burghley. Furthermore, in the shape of fables they attack 
specific transactions which are related to this policy, and in 
places touch upon matters in Burghley 's life of a personal 
nature. The February eclogue and its fable, under an ob- 
scure allegory, refers to an event of a political rather than 
of an ecclesiastical nature ; the three other eclogues and their 
fables are almost wholly concerned with matters relating 
to the Church. In Elizabeth's time, however, political and 
religious issues were inextricably bound together, and, al- 
though Spenser does not allude, except once, to ecclesiastical 
affairs in the February eclogue, they played an important 
part in the events which he was probably describing. It is 
expedient, therefore, to classify these four eclogues together 
as an expression of the poet's views previous to his depar- 
ture to Ireland. 

In the eyes of Elizabeth's government every opponent of 
its policy who was not a Catholic was a Puritan, and Spen- 
ser, even if he had given voice to little which would have 
connected him with Puritanism in its theological aspect, 
would still have been considered a Puritan on account of 
his general opposition to the government expressed in the 
Calender. Needless to say, however, he frequently ex- 
presses sentiments which could proceed only from one who 
may be regarded as an active Puritan. From both points 
of view, therefore, we are justified in applying to him this 



40 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

name. At the same time he possessed none of that Puritan 
bigotry which in a later age disfigured its cause, and it is 
evident that a sense of loyalty, gratitude for past favors, 
and perhaps a hope for future ones, could sometimes alter 
the prevailing Puritan bias of his opinions. Archbishop 
Grindal, the patron of the Merchant Taylors' School, the 
former Master and the benefactor of the poet's college 
(Pembroke), and the advocate of leniency in the dealings 
of the government with Puritan non-conformists, received 
Spenser's outspoken support when he lay under the royal 
frown ;^ yet Grindal belonged to the Anglican hierarchy 
which Spenser and other Puritans openly assailed. 

In regard to the interpretation of two of the fables, 
which I believe allude to events occurring during Spenser 's 
residence at Cambridge, a general explanation of his meth- 
ods of composition should be offered. For various reasons 
it seems probable that the poet composed parts of the 
Calender while he still remained a member of the Uni- 
versity.^ This contention may be argued from our knowl- 
edge of his usual methods of composition. The Faerie 
Queene, licensed December 1, 1589, we are informed had 
been begun some little while before April 10, 1580, when 
the poet desired Harvey's "long expected Judgement ".^ 
Several of the poems included in the volume of Com- 
plaints (1591) had been composed many years before 
their publication. Virgil's Gnat is described as "long 
since dedicated to the most noble and excellent lord, the 
Earle of Leicester, late deceased";* the date to which this 
refers is generally considered to be before Spenser left for 

^ In the July eclogue. 

* The late Mr. F. T. Palgrave gave it aa his opinion ' ' that the 
Calender was, at least in great part, the work of the years between 
1573 . . . and 1579", etc. (Spenser, ed. Grosart, IV, p. xxvii). 

^Harvey, Worlcs (ed. Grosart), I, p. 38. 

* Globe ed., p. 504. 



ECCLESIASTICAL ECLOGUES 41 

Ireland as secretary to Lord Grey in the summer of 1580. 
In the foreword to the Mother Huhherd's Tale the poet 
has announced that it was ''long sithens composed in the 
raw coneeipt of my youth ".^ The Hymne in Honour of 
Love and the Hymne in Honour of Beautie, although 
first published in 1596, belonged to "the greener times" 
of his " youth ".^ Other examples might be cited from 
various writings mentioned in the Harvey-Spenser corre- 
spondence of 1579-80 which are generally believed to have 
been incorporated into the Faerie Queene. In fact the 
poet seems usually to have allowed an interval of a few 
years to elapse between the commencement of a work and 
its publication. It is therefore not improbable that Spen- 
ser may have begun the Shepherd's Calender as early 
as 1573, for instance, and have gradually composed the 
remainder of it during the years following. Specific rea- 
sons, moreover, give weight to this general probability. 

In his comments upon the November eclogue and its 
gloss Craik has called attention to the fact that "repeated 
references . . . of E. K. to the opinion of other critics or 
readers upon passages in a work as yet unpublished are 
very curious; they would seem to imply that the Shepherd's 
Calender had been extensively circulated in manuscript".'' 
This remark had been evoked by the glosses on "the greate 
shepehearde" and Dido (1. 38). The former E. K. 
described as "some man of high degree, and not, as some 
vainely suppose, God Pan"; the latter he declared was 
"not Rosalind, as som imagin". In the introductory gloss 
to the October eclogue on the question of the identification 
of Cuddie with Colin E. K. remarks "that some doiibt that 
the persons be different". In the "argument" of the 

Uhid., p. 512. 
• lUd., p. 592. 
''Spenser and Ms Poetry (1871), p. 84. 



42 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

"November" the commentator points out that "the per- 
sonage (Dido) is secrete, and to me altogether unknowne, 
albe of him selfe I often required the same". As Craik 
pointed out, the inference to be drawn from these comments 
is that the Calender had been circulated in manuscript, 
and furthermore that certain parts of it, on this account, 
must have been composed some time before E. K. wrote the 
gloss (i. e. between September, 1578, and April 10, 1579^). 
Now the four eclogues which we are considering natu- 
rally fall within the same classification, not only because of 
their political and ecclesiastical satire and their use of the 
fable, but also on account of their more elementary metres 
— i. e. the accentual and the ballad — , their separation from 
the Romance of Colin, and their lack of allusion, in general, 
to the people of the Court, such as Queen Elizabeth® and 
the Earl of Leicester.^" The only reference in these to 
Colin Clout, the shepherd author-poet, occurs in the Sep- 
tember eclogue, and then in a manner suggestive of inter- 
polation. In the course of his conversation with Diggon 
Davie, Hobbinol praises the good shepherd Roffy: 

" Colin Clout, I wene, be his selfe boye, 
(Ah, for Colin, he whilome my ioye!) 
Shepheards sich, God mought us many send, 
That doen so carefully theyr flocks tend." 

(11. 176-9) 

Taken grammatically the last two lines should be descriptive 
of Colin Clout; in reality they can be applied only to 
Roffy, for in Spenser's ecclesiastical eclogues the keeper of 

" Cf. below, p. 177. 

' The April and October eclogues contain references to the Queen ; 
of course I believe that she is represented in the February eclogue, 
but in that case the poet thinks of her as the symbol of English gov- 
ernment rather than as the goddess of the Court. 

^" Allusion is made to Leicester in the April, October, and November 
eclogues. 



ECCLESIASTICAL ECLOGUES 43 

a flock always stands for a clergyman.^^ Spenser, of course, 
was not a minister, neither is Colin Clout (Spenser) here 
represented as the owner or keeper of a flock. It is clear 
from the context that the closing lines form a natural con- 
elusion to Hobbinol's estimate of Roffy. The sense points 
in one direction, the grammar in another, and the best ex- 
planation seems to be that Spenser made a hasty inter- 
polation in order to connect this eclogue with the general 
scheme of the Calender through the mention of Colin 
Clout, as well as to express his gratitude to Roffy. It is 
evident, therefore, that these four eclogues stand apart 
from the remainder of Spenser's poem. 

Let us now turn to the events of the poet's life during 
the years from 1573 to 1580. We find that the January, 
April, June, August, October, November, and December 
eclogues are connected with the Romance of Colin. Now 
the view which has been usually taken by the biographers 
of Spenser, and the one which I have substantially adopted, 
is that Rosalind came into Spenser's life after his residence 
at the University had ceased (1576). Of course he may 
have known her previously, but it was presumably from 
this date that she began to play a part in his life. Sim- 
ilarly, it is only among these seven eclogues that references 
are found to the Earl of Leicester and his relatives, with 
whom Spenser seems to have also come into contact only 
after he had departed from the University, a theory for 
which I argue in a subsequent part of this work. In other 
words, whether or not we believe that the eclogues in ques- 
tion were all composed at nearly the same time, they are 
taken up with subjects and influences in Spenser's life 
with which the February, May, July, and September 
eclogues are not concerned. The first group reflects the in- 
fluence of courtly refinement, the second the tumultuous 

"Hobbinol (Harvey) was not a clergyman, but neither is he de- 
scribed as the possessor of a flock. 



44 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

atmosphere of Cambridge. The religious controversies of 
this community have been already described. That the young 
poet was keenly interested in them would be extremely 
probable, even if we did not possess direct evidence to the 
fact. Such testimony, however, is at hand. Harvey, Avrit- 
ing to Spenser on April 7, 1580, communicates the follow- 
ing piece of news: "no more adoe aboute Cappes and Sur- 
plesses: Maister Cartwright nighe forgotten ".^^ A little 
later he refers to the continuation of academic disputes: 
'^caetera faere, ut olim: Bellum, inter capita, & membra 
continuatum" }^ Now the vividness of Spenser's satire 
points to the composition of these eclogues at a time when 
he lived in the midst of a controversial atmosphere, before 
he had acquired social intercourse with members of the 
Court, — or at a period shortly afterward. For all these 
reasons, therefore, — the artistic divisions of the Shep- 
herd's Calender, its biographical allusions taken in con- 
sideration with our knowledge of the life of the poet, and 
the methods of composition which he usually employed. — 
it is probable that events described in some of Spenser's 
fables occurred while he was still at the University. 

Another point which I must emphasize before discussing 
these eclogues in detail is |Jiat Spenser's allegory in the 
Calender, so far as it is positively known, relates al- 
most entirely to persons who lived in the world's eye. 
In the April and November eclogues he sounds the praises 
of the shepherdess Elisa, Queen Elizabeth; in the "Oc- 
tober" he hails Leicester as "the worthy" whom the Queen 
"loveth best". To Archbishop Grindal and to Bishop 
Aylmer" he clearly alludes in the July eclogue. His 

'^Harvey, Worlcs, 1, p. 71. 

^^Ibid., p. 73. 

"For the prevailing fashion of anagrammatizing Aylmer's name 
I refer the reader to Harington, Nugae Antiquae, II, Life of Aylmer, 
and to the Marprelate tracts, passim. Spenser may have noticed the 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 45 

friends Hobbinol, Piers, and Cuddie appear as spokesmen, 
but the real interest is reserved for distinguished persons 
who played important parts in the public life of the time. 
A strong inference remains, therefore, that the unex- 
plained portions of his allegory also allude to the same 
kind of persons and to correspondingly important events. 
The resolute silence of the commentator, E. K., in regard 
to Spenser's fables, indicates that the poet was shooting at 
big game. In an age when so-called libels against the 
government, either from Catholics or Puritans, were pun- 
ished with the fine and imprisonment of their authors, a 
writer on political or ecclesiastical topics was treading on 
dangerous ground. A few months previous to the publi- 
cation of the Calender Spenser beheld a frightful 
example of the severity of the government in the punish- 
ment of John Stubbs, who had attacked the Duke of 
Alencon and the French marriage, and who lost his right 
hand for his pains. The printer of Stubbs 's book was Hugh 
Singleton, who also brought out the first edition of the 
Calender, and who transferred it to another stationer 
in October, 1580. Perhaps Singleton, who had been con- 
demned along with Stubbs, but who had received the royal 
pardon, did not care to place himself in jeopardy again 
after people had discovered the true bent of Spenser's satire. 
Keeping the points in view which I have been emphasiz- 
ing, I shall proceed to a discussion of these eclogues one by 
one, and, first of all, of the * ' February ' '. 

(2) The February Eclogue 

At the opening of the argument of Spenser's second 
eclogue E. K. writes as follows: "this ^glogue is rather 
morall and generall, then bent to any secrete or particular 

name Morel in the prologue to the pseudo-Chaucerian Bemedie of 
Love, as Todd points out, I, p. 114. 



46 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

purpose". Those who trust in E. K.'s sincerity may well 
accept this statement and never seek to find a hidden mean- 
ing in the fable of the Oak and the Briar. The discovery 
of the sources of the Calender, however, has seriously 
impugned the trustworthiness of E. K.'s dicta. If he can 
remain entirely silent when Spenser paraphrases Man- 
tuan and Marot in the July and December eclogues re- 
spectively, to mention no other points of indebtedness, he 
is certainly capable of obscuring the sense of an allegory 
applicable to important contemporaneous events. In the 
former case he is merely holding up his poet as an original 
creator instead of as an imitator, in the latter he is attempt- 
ing to deny responsibility for any dangerous meaning 
which this poet may have intended to give. Again, cog- 
nizant as we are of Spenser's allegorical methods of refer- 
ring to important personages, not only in the Calender, 
but in all his subsequent poetry, and considering the 
fashion of the poets of his time to represent public and 
private events by allegory, the fable of the Oak and the 
Briar would present an anomaly if "more" was not 
"meant than meets the ear". 

But this is not all. There is evidence of a more positive 
kind which clearly indicates that this fable has something 
more than a merely "morall and generall" meaning. In 
the Briar's description of himself occur the following sig- 
nificant lines : 

" Seest how fresh my flowers bene spredde, 
Dyed in lilly white and Cremsin redde, 
With Leaves engrained in lusty greene; 
Colours meete to clothe a mayden Queene." 

(11. 129-32) 

The reference to Queen Elizabeth is, of course, unmistak- 
able, and shows at once that Spenser's attention was not 
wholly diverted from important persons. Evidence of a 



THE PEBRUAEY ECLOGUE 47 

similar nature arises in other places, one of which is the 
historical description of the Oak prior to his fall : 

" For it had bene an auneient tree, 
Sacred with many a mysteree, 
And often erost with the priestes crewe, 
And often halowed with holy-water dewe : 
But sike fancies weren foolerie, 
And broughten this Oake to this miserye; 
For nought mought they quitten him from decay," 

(11. 207-213) 

E. K. in his gloss to 1. 209 writes as follows: " the priests 
crewe, holy water pott, wherewith the popishe priest used 
to sprinckle and hallowe the trees from mischaunce. Such 
blindnesse was in those times, which the Poete supposeth to 
have bene the finall decay of this auneient Oake." This 
explanation records the fact that the Oak's decay originated 
in the sprinkling of water by the priests. But this attri- 
bution, like so many of Spenser's allusions to nature, is 
inaccurate. No tree which is carefully looked after and 
whose roots are watered is brought to decay by the cause 
here given. The original object of the watering of trees 
was to keep them in a state of preservation, and the science 
of gardening, well known in the times of Elizabeth,^^ con- 
tradicts any such theory as the one advanced by Spenser 
and E. K. for the Oak's decay. The true explanation of 
this inaccuracy lies in the fact that both Spenser and E. K. 
are thinking of what the Oak represents, and not of the 
Oak itself. It is evident that whatever or whoever the Oak 
stands for was brought to decay or undermined by some 
"popishe" practices. In other words, a relation exists be- 
tween the Oak and the Catholic religion. 

Another bit of evidence that specific persons and events 

"BuTgliley's gardens at Theobalds and the Earl of Arundel's at 
Nonsuch were famous (cf. Hentzner's Travels). 



48 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

are alluded to is found in the extremely vivid satire on 
courtiers represented by the speech and actions of the 
Briar. After his grovelling supplication (11. 150-6), his 
proceedings are thus described : 

" With painted words tho gan this proude weede, 
(As most usen Ambitious folke:) 
His colowi-ed crime with craft to cloke." 

(11. 160-2) 

To the beginning of the Briar's speech (1. 150) E. K. 
attaches this comment : " a maner of supplication, wherein 
is kindly coloured the affection and speache of Ambitious 
men". The whole speech and conduct of the Briar is 
clearly designed, when taken in conjunction with the refer- 
ence to the "mayden Queene" (1. 132), to be an attack 
upon some courtier, statesman, or favorite of Queen 
Elizabeth. 

Convinced as I am that this fable has a reference to con- 
temporaneous political events, I will now examine the con- 
tents for the purpose of gaining details which may serve 
for identification. To begin with, the Oak and the Briar, 
it is to be noted, belong to the "Husbandman", for they 
stand upon his land. This owner, as it happens, one day 
makes a survey of his property : 

" Yt ehaunced after upon a day. 
The Hus-bandman selfe to come that way, 
Of custome for to survewe his grownd, 
And his trees of state in compasse rownd : " 

(11. 143-6) 

He is recognized as the ''lord" (1. 149) of this "grownd", 
— in fact the Briar calls him "my liege Lord" (1. 150), — 
and the trees are designated "his trees of state". This 
last E. K. explains as "taller trees, fitte for timber wood". 
The Briar, however, is certainly not a tree of state, a 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 49 

taller tree, in this sense, and yet he must be included in 
the "trees of state", or else it would be unnatural for the 
husbandman to pay such quick heed to the plea of an unim- 
portant tree. "Trees of state", therefore, do not mean 
what E. K, says they do. Again the allegorical intention 
appears, and it becomes probable that the word "state" 
is used in its more concrete sense to denote a country or 
government. If this is true, it implies that the husband- 
man is the ruler of this country or government, and indeed 
his appellations, besides those already noticed, justify this 
view. The Briar is his "poore Vassall" and describes 
him as 

"... my soveraigne ! Lord of creatures all, 
Thou placer of plants both humble and tall," 

(11. 163-4) 

The husbandman, moreover, has planted the Briar, and the 
latter declares that his intention in so doing had been to 
make him "the primrose of all his land". This language 
evidently means something more than the mere appeal of 
a servant to a master. It recognizes an absolute authority 
in the husbandman and a position without rival in the 
"grownd" which he owns. This position is further inti- 
mated by a subsequent remark of the Briar in his com- 
plaint : 

" Untimely my flowres forced to fall, 
That bene the honor of your Coronall : " 

(11. 177-8) 

E. K. explains "CoronaU" by "Garlande". If we accept 
this meaning, the question arises: what is a husbandman 
doing with a garland? The picture of a farmer walking 
about his land and crowned with a wreath would be some- 
what ludicrous. If the "shepheards daughters" (1. 120) 
were intended, the case would be different. Garlands are 
5 



50 spensee's shepherd's calender 

the natural property of country lasses, and always have 
been. Such is not the application, however, and the fact 
remains that the husbandman has a ' ' Coronall ' '. 

My explanation of this curious feature lies in the com- 
bination of this passage with one already quoted, when the 
Briar calls attention to the beauty of his blossoms : 

" Seest how fresh my flowers bene spredde, 
Dyed in Lilly white and Cremsin redde, 
With Leaves engrained in lusty greene; 
Colours meete to clothe a mayden Queene." 

(11. 129-32) 

The Briar's flowers are "meete" for a "mayden Queene", 
and they are also the "honor" of the husbandman's 
"Coronall". But this is rather slighting praise for Queen 
Elizabeth, to be held up in comparison with a husband- 
man ! And a wreath of flowers, moreover, is inappropriate 
for a mere farmer. Such is the actual case, and the solu- 
tion seems to be simply this: Elizabeth and the husband- 
man are one and the same person. The submissive, adula- 
tory language of the Briar, the absolute authority vested 
in the husbandman, which is especially marked in the de- 
struction of the Oak, the significance of the "trees of 
state ' ', and the propriety of the term ' ' Coronall ' ', which is 
undoubtedly intended to designate both a garland and a 
crown, — all these facts become clear in their relation to 
each other if this view is adopted. When we remember that 
Spenser's attention was devoted to important persons, this 
theory becomes extremely probable. The fact that Eliza- 
beth appears as a man is not antagonistic.^® A woman 
would fit less easily into this fable. There would be some- 
thing incongruous in the picture of a woman who wielded 
an axe and chopped down a large tree. If Spenser had 

"C/. the Mother Hubierd's Tale, in which the Lion represents 
Elizabeth. 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 51 

represented Elizabeth as a woman, the satire, which was 
probably sufficiently clear already, would have become 
pointed. He evidently wished to leave a loop-hole of 
escape by which he could disavow any dangerous intention. 

So far, my view of the Oak and Briar fable carries with 
it a reasonable degree of probability. From a combina- 
tion of references I have attempted to establish the identity 
of the "Husbandman". For the remainder of my theory 
I can advance no claims of absolute proof. To present a 
solution which tallies so closely with the known opinions of 
Spenser and with the incidents of the fable that the like- 
ness seems more than fortuitous certainly lies within my 
power, and, since that is my task, I shall state my conclu- 
sions first. I believe that the fable of the Oak and the 
Briar refers to the fall and execution of the Duke of Nor- 
folk, that he it is who is meant by the Oak, and that the 
Briar stands for Burghley.^'^ 

Admitting that the "Husbandman" designates Eliza- 
beth, it is at once evident that the Oak and the Briar, the 
"trees of state", represent men prominent in the affairs of 
the kingdom. If important personages were not intended, 
there would be small need of obscuring the meaning of the 
fable. Beginning with the description of the Briar, it is 
clear, from the language placed in his mouth, from his 
miserable condition after the Oak's fall, and from the fact 
that the shepherd Thenot is attacking the ingratitude of 
youth, which the Briar symbolizes, that the point of the 
whole fable is primarily a satire upon the Briar and what- 
ever it represents, rather than a lament over the departed 

" For an illustration of a prevalent method of referring to courtiers 
and noblemen under the allegory of trees^ notice the following curious 
extract from the State Papers: "I have wondered at the great sway 
of the Earl of Leicester at Court, and how so great a tree should 
suddenly sprout and overshadow all the trees in Court" (Cal. State 
Papers, Bom., Add., 1580-1625, p. 136). 



52 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

glory of the Oak, If the Briar, therefore, represents 
Burghley, a motive must be found for Spenser's attack on 
this powerful nobleman who guided the ship of state. 
The poet's subsequent dislike of Burghley crops out in 
various places, and, even if he had left no record of his 
views, it would be unreasonable to believe that his attitude 
could be anything but cool towards one who was the con- 
stitutional enemy of his patron, the Earl of Leicester. It 
is necessary to the success of my theory, however, to prove 
that Spenser had strong reason to dislike Burghley at the 
period when he composed this eclogue, which I believe to 
have been before he received the patronage of Leicester 
and Philip Sidney. 

These grounds of dislike, whether or not my solution of 
the Oak and Briar fable is believed, probably arose from 
Spenser's residence at a University where Puritan objec- 
tions against the Established Church ran high, and where 
Burghley, as Chancellor of that University, symbolized all 
that was hateful to the Puritans. It was Burghley who 
supported Whitgift and the Heads of colleges in their 
measures against Cartwright, whose talents and eloquence 
had undoubtedly attracted Spenser in much the same way 
as they did the great majority of undergraduates; it was 
Burghley who approved of the new statutes against which 
such a storm of obloquy arose at their promulgation in 1572 ; 
it was Burghley to whose authority the Heads constantly 
applied when individuals publicly attacked their adminis- 
tration, as we have already seen.^^ Even if Spenser was 
not a thorough-going theological Puritan, he would never 
have voiced objections to the Established Church in the 
Calender unless he had been out of sympathy with the 
views of the one man beyond all others who regulated the 
policy of its bishops. As far as a motive is concerned, 

"C/. supra, i, (3). 



i 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 53 

therefore, it is evident that Spenser would have had an 
antagonism towards Burghley during his collegiate days 
strong enough to induce him to write a satire, as long as 
he meant to deal with public events in his writings at all. 

The execution of the Duke of Norfolk was an event which 
stirred England to its depths, connected as it was with the 
two vital questions of the day, religion and the succession 
to the throne. Apart from his opposition to Burghley, and 
the natural pity of a sensitive nature for an unfortunate 
wretch, several specific reasons can be brought forward 
which make it probable that Spenser was interested in the 
fate of the Duke. In the first place, Norfolk was High- 
Steward of the town of Cambridge when the poet matricu- 
lated. In that position he enjoyed the good- will of the 
University, a feeling which was probably increased in 1569 
when he threatened to resign his office. "On the 7th of 
August, the Vice chancellor and Heads wrote to Sir Wil- 
liam Cecil, the Chancellor, that it had been lately signified 
to them that the Duke of Norfolk intended to withdraw 
his patronage from the townsmen, in consequence of the 
contentions in the Corporation, and of his advice having 
been unworthily neglected in the late election of mayor and 
bailiffs. They therefore petitioned Sir William Cecil, that 
he would persuade the Duke to renounce the townsmen, 
if he had not already done so, and that he would induce 
him to adhere to his resolution, lest overcome by the solici- 
tations of the townsmen he should receive them again into 
his protection."^" This petition, it would appear, was suc- 
cessful, for in January, 1570, an order was passed by the 
Corporation of Cambridge, supplicating "the Duke of 
Norfolk to resume the office of High Steward of the town, 
which he had resigned".-" By his marriage with the 

"Cooper, Annals, II, p. 242. 
^Ibid., p. 269. 



54 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

daughter of Thomas, Lord Audley, who founded Magda- 
lene College, he became its patron and benefactor, and 
upon the Queen's visit to the University in 1564 he 
bestowed on this college a considerable sum of money, and 
promised "£40 by year till they had builded the quadrant 
. . . and further promised, 'that he would endow them with 
land for the encrease of their number and studys' ".^^ 

In addition to these connections with the town and the 
University of Cambridge, he had other associations which 
would have made him familiar to Spenser. Owing to his 
large estates in this part of the country, of which the most 
important were a country-seat at Audley End, near Saffron 
Walden, where Harvey lived, and which was distant four- 
teen miles from Cambridge, and his park at Kenninghall, 
Norfolk, about forty miles distant, and owing to his posi- 
tion as a Commissioner of Musters for Cambridge and to his 
hereditary jurisdiction in the neighboring shires of Nor- 
folk and Suffolk, which also extended into some parts of 
Cambridgeshire and Essex, he was regarded with great 
affection as the feudal lord of that part of England. 

In particular, however, there were special considerations, 
besides his hard fate and his commanding position in the 
neighboring country. John Fox, the martyrologist, and the 
intimate friend of Archbishop Grindal, was his tutor,-- and 
retained the Duke's respect and affection until the end of 
his life, when he attended him to the scaffold.^^ After sen- 
tence of death had been pronounced upon him, it was for 
Alexander No well, the Dean of St. Paul's and the brother 
of Robert Nowell, Spenser's early benefactor, that he sent. 
He stated that he desired to end his days with Nowell,^* a 
wish which was fulfilled, for the latter also accompanied 

"Nichols, Progresses of Elisabeth, I, p. 182, 

^Cooper, Athenae, I, p. 302. 

^ Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, p. 461. 

"* Lemon, Cal. State Papers, p. 444. 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 55 

him to the scaffold.-^ Now Fox was a Puritan, while Nowell 
entertained Puritan opinions and always advocated leniency 
towards the non-conformists. Two famous Puritans, 
Thomas Sampson and Edward Dering, also enjoyed the 
Duke's confidence in a like prominent measure. Sampson, 
the deprived Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, conducted 
the burial service of the second Duchess of Norfolk by 
special request of the Duke's council. Edward Dering, the 
celebrated scholar and fellow of Christ's College, Cam- 
bridge, who died in 1576, and in whom Spenser could 
scarcely fail to have been interested as a distinguished 
member of his University and as a leader of the Puritans, 
was the Duke's chaplain,-" Both these men the Duke re- 
quested to see, after the pronouncement of his sentence.^^ 
It is curious to note that three of these men were Puritans, 
and that the fourth held many Puritan views, whose opin- 
ions as leaders of his party Spenser undoubtedly respected. 
At this point a paradox arises. Is it possible to believe 
that the Puritan Spenser, in spite of the reasons advanced, 
could have supported the head of the Catholic family of 
Howard, the brother-in-law of three powerful Catholic 
noblemen,^^ the aspirant to the hand of the Catholic Queen 
of Scots, and a leader to whom the Catholics looked for the 
restoration of their religion? The explanation of this ap- 
parent difficulty is simple : it has never been proved that 
Norfolk was a Catholic, and furthermore it is certain that 

^ Strype, ibid. 

*" Dering took an active part in the Cartwright controversy ; he 
wrote several vigorous letters to Burghley on this subject. In 1573 
his bold attacks on the Anglican system led to his suspension from 
his duties as divinity reader at St. Paul's Cathedral. Cooper (Athenae, 
1, pp. 354-7) gives a good account of him. 

^ Lemon, ibid., pp. 434, 436. 

** The Earl of Westmoreland, who led the rebellion of 1569, Lord 
Scrope of Bolton, and Lord Berkeley, each of whom married a sister 
of the Duke. 



56 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

many of his contemporaries believed him to be a Protestant, 
perhaps a Puritan. In addition to his friendship with the 
four Puritan clergymen mentioned above, he strictly denied 
more than once that he was a Catholic,-® and in his speech 
on the scaffold asserted his Protestantism and renounced 
the Pope.^** Without other testimony, the truth of his own 
religious professions under these circumstances might be 
doubtful. In a letter written by Mary Stuart to the Bishop 
of Ross, February 8, 1571, she stated that ''Norfolk was to 
be asked to pledge himself finally to become a Catholic; 
doubt as to his religion, she says, having been the prin- 
cipal reason for Philip V^ lukewarmness "^- towards the 
plot of Norfolk and Ridolfi for her liberation. Upon the 
examination of the attainted Earl of Northumberland in 
June, 1572, just after Norfolk's execution, he declared that 
he had sent word to Mary Stuart just previous to the re- 
bellion in the autumn of 1569 that "her marriage with the 
Duke was misliked, he being counted a Protestant".^* Here 
are three of the most prominent people of the time con- 
nected with the Catholic plots against Elizabeth's govern- 
ment who sincerely doubted Norfolk's Catholicism. In the 
examination of those who were concerned in the abortive 
Catholic rebellion in Norfolk in 1570, the Queen's two 
attorneys declared that the Duke of Norfolk was "as good 
a Protestant as any in England".** Strype speaks of him 
as "the favorite now (1565) both of the court and peo- 
ple".*^ In fact he was the most popular nobleman in the 
kingdom, even at the time of his death.**' Sir Robert Mel- 

^ Strype, Annals, I, pt. 2, p. 242; Lemon, p. 302. 

^ Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 463-4. 

" The King of Spain. 

'-M. A. S. Hume, The Great Lord Burghley, pp. 256-7, 

^ Green, Cal. State Papers, Bom., Add., p. 403. 

^ Strype, Annals, 1, pt. 2, p. 366. 

^'Ihid., p. 197. 

'^Hume, Burghley, p. 268. 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 57 

ville^^ in his Memoirs writes of him: "the great men, 
v»^ho were papists, were all his near kinsmen; whom he 
entertained with great wisdom and discretion. And the 
Protestants had such good proof of his godly life and con- 
versation, that they loved him entirely. "^^ In his dealings 
with Fox, moreover, he seems to have conducted himself 
like a Puritan, for at his old tutor's request he invited 
Peter Martyr, the celebrated Reforming preacher who had 
formerly lectured at Oxford, to return to England,^^ and 
he hearkened to the cause of Lawrence Humphrey in 1565 
when the latter had been punished for non-conformity.*° 
After the weight of this testimony has been duly considered, 
it is clear that matters of religion would not have pre- 
vented Spenser as a Puritan from lamenting the fall of this 
great nobleman. 

Up to this point I have accounted for the motives which 
may have been supposed to have guided Spenser's design, 
provided that he had Lord Burghley and the Duke of 
Norfolk in mind. It remains to consider the appropriate- 
ness of the incidents in the Oak and Briar fable to the fall 
of the Duke of Norfolk and to his relations with Lord 
Burghley from Spenser's point of view. Without going 
into the details of the actions of Cecil and Norfolk from the 
autumn of 1568 until the latter 's trial in January, 1572, 
a proceeding which would involve an account of the history 
of England during that period, it will be enough to point 
to a few facts. Spenser, like the mass of his countrymen, 
could have known little of the secret transactions which led 
to Norfolk's ruin. All that he could have known was that 
a struggle had taken place among the advisers of the Queen, 

^ The famous Scotch diplomat of this period, who was constantly 
employed on political affairs which kept him in England. 
^ Quoted by Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, p. 192. 
"" Ibid., I, pt. 1, p. 381. 
** Strype, ParTcer, I, p. 368, 



58 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

among whom Norfolk represented the nobility of ancient 
lineage, and Cecil, the unpopular Chancellor of Spenser's 
University, the new order of men, the upstarts of the 
Reformation. 

In the autumn of 1568, urged on by the Catholic nobility, 
who wished to settle once and for all the succession to the 
Crown, and who were opposed to the foreign policy of Cecil 
and to the progress of the Reformation, Norfolk took up 
the scheme of marrying the Queen of Scots. Although his 
resolution was staggered when he examined the celebrated 
Casket letters,*^ the authenticity of which he did not deny, 
he persevered in his determination. In this course of action 
he received not only the support of the Catholic nobility, 
headed by the Earls of Arundel, Derby, Northumberland, 
Cumberland, and Westmoreland, Lord Montagu, and Lord 
Lumley, but also the assistance of a reactionary Protestant 
element, represented in the Queen's Council by the Earls 
of Leicester, Pembroke, and Sussex, and Sir Nicholas 
Throgmorton. Many of the first faction consented to the 
project with the greatest reluctance, for they did not believe 
that Norfolk was a Catholic, and the northern ones, at 
least, objected to his claims to the Dacres estates.*- Of the 
second faction many undoubtedly thought that the mariage 
of Mary Stuart with Norfolk would be the only security for 
her good behavior and for the peace of the realm. Nor- 
folk probably dangled before Leicester's eyes the bait of 
an eventual marriage with Elizabeth, and in this way 
secured his backing. Chiefly through the irresolution of 
Norfolk and a combination of circumstances which pre- 
vented the snapping of the strained relations between Eng- 

*^ The compromising letters of Mary Stuart to the Earl of Both- 
well at the time of her husband Darnley's murder. 

" Through the marriages of two of his sons to the heiresses of the 
last Lord Dacres. 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 59 

land and Spain, and which thus vindicated Cecil's foreign 
policy, Norfolk's plans for the marriage and the overthrow 
of the government led to his own imprisonment in the 
Tower. In September, 1569, after Elizabeth had sharply 
reprimanded him for his negotiations with ]\Iary Stuart, he 
suddenly left the Court, which was then at Titchfield near 
Southampton, without permission, and retired first to the 
Charterhouse, his London residence, and later to his home 
at Kenninghall in Norfolk. While in London his failing 
courage instigated him to warn the Earl of Northumber- 
land against taking the field in the north. "He believed 
that the Queen would not venture to send for him among 
a people who would have given their lives had he required 
them in his defence,"*^ and, even when a message finally 
arrived ordering him to return, he at first hesitated. A 
few days later, however, at the beginning of October, his 
resolution again failed, and he returned to London. On 
the 8th of October Elizabeth commissioned Sir Francis 
Knollys to conduct him to the Tower. Here he remained 
while the insurrection of the northern Earls and the sub- 
sequent rising of Leonard Dacres were in progress. At 
the same time Norfolk's friends in the Council were dis- 
graced and placed under surveillance.** From the Tower 
he wrote penitent letters to the Queen full of fine phrases 
and disclaiming all intentions of acting contrary to her 
pleasure. But these availed him little. To Elizabeth he 
renounced the Scotch marriage, while to Mary Stuart he 
renewed his promises.*^ In March of the next year, how- 
ever, Leicester, who wished to break Cecil's influence with 
the Queen, persuaded her to restore to favor Norfolk's 
relations, Arundel and Lumley.*^ These noblemen at once 

" Froude, IX, p. 488. 
" Ibid., p. 486. 
*^Ibid., p. 503. 
'"Ibid., X, pp. 36-8. 



60 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

continued their former plotting, which was "to overthrow 
Cecil and Bacon", now the only defenders of the Protes- 
tant foreign policy, to "release the Duke of Norfolk, marry 
him to the Queen of Scots, and restore the Catholic reli- 
gion".*^ Their influence so far prevailed with the Queen 
that Cecil was driven to extremities, and Norfolk was so far 
liberated that he could reside at the Charterhouse under easy 
surveillance. The failures of the Huguenots in France, the 
Pope's bull of excommunication, the closing of the Spanish 
harbors to English ships, and the internal disturbances of 
the kingdom, which arose from the uncertain position of the 
Queen of Scots, were the principal reasons which induced 
the Queen to conciliate the Catholic party. 

Although Norfolk had been released from the Tower on 
the understanding that he would "deal no more in the 
matter of the Queen of Scots", he immediately pledged 
himself a second time to her cause.*^ During the winter of 
1571 he entered into what is known as the Ridolfi conspir- 
acy, designed to overthrow the existing government and to 
re-establish Catholicism with the co-operation of the Pope 
and Philip of Spain. Norfolk had wavered at the time of 
the northern insurrection and again in the year 1570, when 
the Earl of Derby and his sons were prepared to rebel, but 
he now set his hand to a paper which Ridolfi was to show in 
turn to the Duke of Alva, the Pope, and Philip, and which 
sanctioned the entrance of a Spanish army into England.'*^ 
The disaffection of the nobility, moreover, was increased 
by the negotiations pending for the marriage of Elizabeth 
with the Duke of Anjou, for they were violently opposed to 
an alliance with England's ancient enemy. It is unneces- 
sary to enumerate the subsequent details of the conspiracy. 

« Ibid., IX, p. 38. 
*'Ibid., X, p. 118. 
" Ibid., X, p. 156. 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 61 

Through the watchfulness of Burghley, through the inter- 
ception of letters from Alva to the Bishop of Ross, through 
the pretended desertion of Sir John Hawkins to the King 
of Spain, and through the co-operation of the Florentine 
ambassador at Antwerp, the government discovered that a 
Catholic invasion of England was being hatched, sanctioned 
by an agent who professed to represent three-quarters of 
the English nobility."^" Norfolk's complicity, which Cecil 
had suspected, came out when a bag of gold and a letter in 
cipher, intended for Mary Stuart's supporters, fell into 
Cecil's hands through the discovery of a Shropshire mer- 
chant to whose charge they had been committed by the 
Duke's servants.^^ The separate examination of these two 
men and the Duke, whose stories contradicted each other, 
brought out the truth. On September 7 the latter was 
again committed to the Tower, where he broke down and 
acted in an abject manner. Gradually Cecil unravelled the 
mystery of the whole conspiracy. "When Mary Stuart's 
agent, the Bishop of Ross, confessed, Norfolk's fate was 
sealed. On the tenth of November he wrote his conf ession,^^ 
and on the sixteenth of January he was condemned to 
death by a jury of twenty-six noblemen in Westminster 
Hall. His end came, after the Queen had many times 
changed her mind, on Tower Hill, June 2, 1572. 

Such in brief are the main events which led up to the 
execution of the Duke of Norkfolk. Although Spenser 
could never have known the history of his secret conduct, 
like the vast majority of his countrymen he probably 
regretted his fate and cast the blame on Burghley. The 
Duke's popularity caused indignation in many quarters at 
the proceedings against him. During the period of his 

^Ibid., X, p. 287. 
" Ibid., p. 291. 
=' Lemon, p. 428. 



62 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

first imprisonment disturbances arose in Norfolk and Suf- 
folk, and among others arrested in connection with these 
for uttering seditious words was one Thomas Cecil, a rela- 
tive of Burghley. The charge laid against him was that he 
had said "that his cousin Cecil was the Queen's darling, 
who was the cause of the Duke of Norfolk's imprisonment". 
Don Guerau, the Spanish ambassador, writing to King 
Philip in September, 1569, after Arundel and the other 
allies of Norfolk had been placed under arrest, remarks 
that "everyone casts the blame on Secretary Cecil, who eon- 
duets these affairs with great astuteness ".^^ In the winter 
of 1570 Leicester, who wished to injure Cecil's standing 
with the Queen, circulated through his agents a story ' ' that 
Cecil and Bacon had proposed to murder Norfolk in the 
Tower, and would have done it but for his own interfer- 
ence"."* Such reports were everywhere current,^^ even in 
Cambridge. One John Bonyfelowe, a scholar of Cam- 
bridge, was examined February 2, 1572, "before the Chan- 
cellor and others, relative to slanderous words spoken of 
Leicester and Burghley ; and that if the Duke was executed 
there would be a rising in Norfolk"."^ Even as late as 
1580 these stories were rife, for in that year certain ser- 
vants of the Earl of Arundel and his brother, the Duke's 
sons, who resided at Audley End, charged Burghley * ' with 
being the cause of the Duke of Norfolk's death ".^'^ In 
short, it is clear that the feeling prevailed in England that 
Burghley was responsible for the death of Norfolk, and 

°« Hume, Burghley, p. 239. 

"Froude, X, p. 37. 

^Cf. especially Lemon, pp. 365, 467; Green, pp. 358, 384; Cal. 
Hatfield MSS., ii, pp. 3, 24, 38 ; Nares, Burghley, II, p. 595. 

■* Lemon, p. 435. 

'"Lemon, p. 665. Sir Walter Ealeigh, writing in 1601 to Eobert 
Cecil, also remarked that the latter 's father "was esteemed to be the 
contriver of Norfolk's ruin" (Murdin, p. 811). 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 63 

that these reports were constantly circulated against him 
as late as the time when the Calender appeared. Nor- 
folk's cause remained a live issue,^* and gave Burghley's 
opponents a convenient weapon for attacking him. 

After this illustration of the popular point of view in 
regard to the relations between Norfolk and Burghley, it 
will be well to return to the contents of the Oak and Briar 
fable. For the reasons previously advanced it seems 
reasonable to believe that by the husbandman Spenser 
intended Elizabeth, and that the "trees of state", there- 
fore, must refer to men who stood high in the affairs of the 
kingdom. What we know of Spenser's political views and 
methods of satire, as revealed elsewhere in the Calender, 
indicates that he was interested in great people and impor- 
tant events. That he was opposed to Burghley's ecclesias- 
tical policy at this time is certain, and it is also extremely 
probable, though not susceptible of absolute proof, that he 
was interested in the fate of the Duke of Norfolk. From 
another point of view, the argument may be advanced that 
no other political event of importance occurred between 
1570 and 1580 which satisfies to an equal degree the inci- 
dents described in the fable of the Oak and the Briar. A 
detailed examination, however, will show the further appli- 
cability of my theory. 

The description of the Oak (11. 102-114) contains several 
elements which peculiarly fit the condition of the Duke of 
Norfolk. Emphasis is laid upon the change of its appear- 
ance: 

" A goodly Oake sometime had it bene, 
With armes full strong and largely displayd, 
But of their leaves they were disarayde : " 

(11. 103-^) 

"' C/. Strype's account (Life of Aylmer, p. 30) of a book which 
re-appeared in 1579, attacking Burghley for Norfolk 's execution. 



64 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Previous to his disgrace the Duke of Norfolk's position had 
been prosperous. Like the Oak he had been 

"the King of the field," 

(1. 108) 

in other words the Earl Marshal, the first peer of the realm. 
The descriptive touch, 

" And mochell mast to the husband did yielde," 

(1. 109) 

may refer to Norfolk's services to the Queen, chief of which 
had been his command of the northern forces at Berwick 
in the war of 1560 against the French and his services as a 
Privy Councillor, while the succeeding line, 

" And with his nuts larded many swine : " 

(1. 110) 

may be easily applied to his keeping many retainers and 
to his hospitality in Norfolk as a great feudal lord. The 
reference to the "stormes" which beset the Oak and to "his 
honor decayed" (the latter is hardly appropriate for a 
tree) are easily applicable to the change in the fortunes of 
the Duke. 

The poet's attention is then directed to the "bragging 
Brere". In the description of it (11. 115-26) emphasis is 
laid upon its pride, largely occasioned by the favor shown 
towards it by the "shepheards daughters" and the night- 
ingale. The general meaning may be that Burghley (the 
"Brere") has become puffed up with the attentions paid 
him by courtiers and politicians, and ventures to compete 
with Norfolk (the Oak), the head of the nobility. With 
this intention of satirizing Burghley, it would have been 
dangerous to enter into too many details. Jealousy arouses 
the anger of the Briar, and it is a matter of fact that Spen- 
ser at about this time attributed Burghley 's hatred of the 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 65 

nobility to the same motive.^^ The first attack of the Briar 
(II. 127-42) and the accompanying discomfiture of the Oak 
may be easily applied to the first imprisonment of Norfolk 
in September, 1569. Here the Briar's reference to the 
''may den Queene" becomes intelligible, when we realize 
that everyone knew that Burghley had the Queen's sup- 
port. It should be noticed that the Oak makes no reply to 
this attack, but he yields 

" with shame and greef e adawed, 
That of a weede he was overerawed." 

(11. 141-2) 

Norfolk's submission was sufficiently tame, especially after 
his flight to Kenninghall, and his subsequent denials and 
retractions in the Tower were abject enough. Like the Oak 
he made no resistance. The fact that the Briar is called a 
"weede" (1. 142), an epithet scarcely true in a botanical 
sense, acquires significance if we remember that Burghley 
had just recently been raised to the peerage (February 25, 
1571), that in spite of the greatest efforts he could never 
satisfactorily trace his pedigree beyond his own grand- 
father, and that the Howards and the ancient nobility 
looked upon him as an upstart. Spenser's desire to be 
recognized as a kinsman by the Spencers of Althorpe indi- 
cates the actual importance which he attributed to an 
honorable lineage. 

The Briar's second attack occurs after the appearance of 
the "Husbandman". This complaint is based upon the 
alleged machinations of his enemy : 

" And, but your goodnes the same recure, 
Am like for desperate doole to dye, 
Through felonous force of mine enemie." 

(11. 154^6) 

^* Mother Hubberd's Tale (Globe ed.), p. 524. 
G 



66 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

To the supporters of Norfolk, as the rumors of the time 
attest, Burghley's conduct seemed to be dictated by the 
fear of his opponents' activities, and, since he sat on the 
jury of peers who condemned Norfolk, it was known to 
everyone that he advocated the execution. Several times 
the Queen revoked the writs signed for Norfolk's death, 
and it was due to Burghley that she finally allowed the law 
to take its course.®" 

The Briar, whom the poet presents as the deviser of a 
false charge (1. 162), then continues his appeal with a jus- 
tification of his conduct : 

" Was not I planted of thine owne hand, 
To be the primrose of all thy land ? " 

(11. 165-6) 

Although Burghley had served as secretary in the Councils 
of Edward VI and of Mary, he became the real director of 
the policy of the realm only after Elizabeth's accession, 
or in other words he was raised by her to be 

" the primrose of all her land." 

(1. 166) 

The Briar proceeds to charge the Oak with ''tyrannic" 
(1. 172), because the latter seeks to oppose him. While 
Norfolk, the representative of the ancient nobility, had 
attempted the overthrow of Burghley, he had led no insur- 
rection like the Earl of Northumberland, and his treason 
was not therefore palpable to the nation at large. To the 
Duke 's sympathizers who knew nothing of the secret history 
of the Ridolfi conspiracy, Burghley's proceedings un- 
doubtedly seemed to be actuated by jealousy and by the 
fear that the Duke would displace him in directing the 
policy of the realm. This appeal of the Briar, therefore, 
'" Hume, Burghley, pp. 267-8. 



THE FEBRUABY ECLOGUE 67 

in which he dwells upon his own excellences, and prefers 
charges against the Oak which the poet infers are untrue, 
is Spenser's allegorical rendering of the arguments which 
he imagined that Burghley might have advanced to the 
Queen. 

At the conclusion of the Briar's speech the Oak attempts 
to make a reply, to which the husbandman refuses to listen 
on account of the rage into which this accusation has 
thrown him. This may be applied to Norfolk's trial, which 
was conducted before a jury of twenty-six peers, the 
majority of whom were under special obligations to Eliza- 
beth or her father for their rank.®^ To Norfolk's sympa- 
thizers this trial must have appeared unfair, as indeed it 
really was in so far as its arbitrary methods of procedure 
are considered. The husbandman soon returns with his 
"harmefull Hatchet" (1. 195), a proceeding closely par- 
allel to the sentence of death by the axe of the executioner, 
issued at the trial on January 16, 1572. The remark that 

" Anger nould let him speake to the tree," 

(1. 199) 

seems to me peculiarly appropriate to the present theory. 
In spite of the most pitiful appeals written to the Queen 
from the Tower after sentence of death had been pro- 
nounced, including a confession which he intended that 
she should see, Elizabeth refused to allow the Duke an 
interview, or even to communicate with him personally.*'- 

Again, the description of the final overthrow of the Oak 
(11. 201-21), in which considerable delay occurred, is singu- 
larly appropriate to the hesitation of the Queen. On the 
9th of February, and again on the 9th of April, Elizabeth 
signed warrants for the execution, which she revoked 

•^ Froude, X, p. 320. 
•^Murclin, pp. 166, 168, 172. 



68 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

within a day or two afterwards.*^" Conditions reached 
such a point that Leicester could write to Walsingham on 
May 21 that he saw "no likelihood" of the Duke's execu- 
tion.®* The reasons which Spenser advances for the delay 
in cutting down the Oak, the reasons why 

" The Axes edge did oft tume againe," 

(1. 203) 

resolve into unwillingness and fear to destroy an ' ' auncient 
tree". Elizabeth seriously objected to public executions, 
and in Norfolk's case the particular causes which urged 
her to "forbeare" (1. 206) arose from his position as the 
first peer of the realm, the head of the ancient family of 
Howard. This account continues : 

" For it had bene an auncient tree, 
Sacred with many a mysteree, 
And often crost with the priestes crewe, 
And often halowed with holy-water dewe : 
But sike fancies weren foolerie, 
And broughten this Oake to this miserye;" 

(11. 207-12) 

This passage forms a fitting apology for the overthrow of 
the Oak and, allegorically, for that of the Duke of Norfolk. 
The poet disclaims the "Popishe""^ practices characteristic 
alike of the tree, on account of the priests' rites, and of 
Norfolk, the general fact of whose dealings with Mary 
Stuart had become matters of common knowledge after his 
trial. These "fancies" the poet acknowledges were 
"foolerie"; he does not seek to palliate the Oak's conduct, 
and he admits that injudicious proceedings led to its 
"overthrow". In this way the cause of Norfolk's fall is 

« Froude, X, pp. 332, 334. 

'^Ibid., p. 363. 

"= Cf. gloss to 1. 209. 



THE FEBRUARY ECLOGUE 69 

to my mind clearly intimated, and, although the poet 
sympathizes with him, he does not seek to extenuate his 
actions, for such a defence would have been dangerous 
were the riddle of the fable guessed. 
While the "goodman" wields his axe, the Oak sighs 

" to see his neare overthrow." 

(1. 216) 

and here is another reference to the appeals of Norfolk 
from the Tower. Finally the end comes: 

" Tho downe to the earth he fell forthwith, 
His wonderous weight made the ground to quake, 
Thearth shronke under him, and seemed to shake :" 

(11. 218-220) 

This ending undoubtedly points to some event of tremen- 
dous importance, for the fact that the earth shrinks beneath 
the weight of the Oak can be applied to no small matter. 
The execution of the Duke of Norfolk, the first peer of the 
realm, seemed to Englishmen of that age an event of the 
greatest import. So far reaching in its consequences was 
it supposed to be that no less a person than Leicester, as 
we have seen, thought that the Queen would refuse her 
consent, and, when she finally acquiesced, all England was 
thunder-struck at the magnitude of the event. 

The conclusion of the fable (11. 222-238) is devoted to an 
attack upon the Briar in the form of a moral. From the 
point of view of my theory its allegory need not be con- 
sidered absolutely true. Libels were scattered broad-cast 
charging Burghley with the death of Norfolk, but it does 
not appear that he ever regretted his conduct, and he cer- 
tainly did not lose the Queen's favor, although she outwardly 
placed the blame on his shoulders in accordance with her 
customary methods of avoiding responsibility for unpopu- 



70 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

lar proceedings. If the allegory is rigidly interpreted, 
however, the date of composition of this eclogue could be 
assigned to the year 1572, shortly after the Duke's inglori- 
ous death, when Burghley appeared to be in disgrace, and 
when pamphlets which attacked him were rife. But it is 
not necessary to accept this last view; I merely wish to 
show that my theory is susceptible of the most strict appli- 
cation. In order to carry out his purpose, and in order to 
point Thenot 's moral, the poet was obliged to represent the 
Briar in a repentant mood, 

" naked left and disconsolate," 

(1. 230) 

and otherwise miserably situated. 

Such is my theory of the allegory of the Oak and Briar 
fable. Unfortunately, like other theories which can be 
advanced concerning the meaning of the fables in the 
Calender, it is not susceptible of absolute proof. For 
the principal reasons advanced above, — i. e. Spenser's in- 
terest in important personages and events, his opposition 
to the policy of Burghley, which probably originated during 
his residence at Cambridge and which is covertly betrayed 
elsewhere in the Calender, the reasonable probability 
that he was interested in the fate of the Duke of Norfolk, 
even if he was not personally acquainted with him,*'^ the 

" Spenser shows a peculiar knowledge of the Howard family. One 
of the prefatory sonnets to the Faerie Queene la addressed to the 
Lord High Admiral of England, Lord Charles Howard of Effingham, 
the first cousin of the Earl of Surrey, the poet, the father of the 
Duke of Norfolk. The Daphnaida, dated January, 1591, is an elegy 
on the death of Douglas Howard, the grand-daughter of the first Lord 
Howard of Bindon, a younger brother of the Earl of Surrey. In 
the preface to this poem he refers to the lineage of the Howards 
and to the cognizance of the family, the "White Lyon", which was 
the dexter supporter of the Duke of Norfolk's armorial bearings J 
(Doyle, Official Barovxige). The certain amount of intimacy indi- 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 71 

peculiar appropriateness of the events relating to the 
Duke's fall to the contents of the fable, many details of 
which become clear only in the light of this allegorical in- 
terpretation, — I hope that my theory will not be entirely 
useless to other laborers in the vineyard of Spenser's 
poetry. 

(3) The May Eclogue 

The February eclogue, according to my theory, contains 
an attack upon the political policy of Elizabeth and Burgh- 
ley in regard to a State event of the greatest importance; 
the May eclogue, I believe, strikes a blow at their ecclesias- 
tical policy and at the conditions which it produced in the 
Church. In the "argument" E, K. with characteristic 
caution announces that the two interlocutors. Piers and 
Palinode, represent ' ' two formes of pastoures or Ministers, 
or the Protestant and the Catholique". The purpose of 
their conversation is to hold up to ridicule the party repre- 
sented by Palinode : ' ' with whom having shewed, that it is 
daungerous to mainteine any felowship, or give too much 
credit to their colourable and feyned good will, he (Piers) 
telleth him a tale of the foxe, that, by such a counterpoynt 
of craftiness, deceived and devoured the credulous kidde". 
With this broad explanation E. K. rests his case and main- 
tains a resolute silence concerning the details of the eccle- 
siastical discussion and this same ' ' tale of the foxe ' ', except 
in a few places,®^ where he has attempted to lull the un- 
suspicious reader into a belief that Spenser was attacking 
the Catholics only. Otherwise his attention is directed to 

cated by these relationa points to a familiarity with the affairs of 
that family which probably originated before 1589, when the dedi- 
catory sonnet to the Lord Admiral appeared, and which may very 
possibly hark back to some connection with the unfortunate Duke of 
Norfolk. 

'" Glosses to 11. 121, 240, 244, 247, 302, 309, and introduction to the 
fable. 



72 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

the illustration of rhetorical beauties and to linguistic elu- 
cidation. The very pointedness of E. K.'s convenient dis- 
avowals of any ulterior purpose on the part of the poet, 
however, produces on further consideration the impression 
that there is really something to conceal. That this is true 
and that Spenser is again shooting at big game seems un- 
deniable. The poet who had lived in a community where 
objections to Elizabeth's ecclesiastical policy were freely 
and violently uttered upon all sides had material from the 
life at his disposal which fitted naturally into the vehicle 
of pastoral poetry. "What this material was and how Spen- 
ser made use of it I shall now attempt to explain. 

According to E. K. the two interlocutors are types of the 
Protestant minister and the Catholic priest. I have at- 
tempted in other places to identify Piers with Thomas 
Preston and Palinode with Dr. Andrew Perne.^^ The 
former identification is unimportant as far as this eclogue 
is concerned, for Piers manifestly expresses Spenser's own 
views; the latter is more important, for Dr. Perne's flexi- 
bility in matters of religion had become a bye-word, not 
only in Cambridge, but wherever Puritan voices were raised 
against the Anglican Church. In fact he combined, as no 
other contemporary of Spenser was able to do, the unpopu- 
larity of a University authority, the pedantry of a scholar 
who over-estimated his ability, and the Catholicism which 
still lurked in the Anglican Church, waiting only for a 
change in the government of the realm to appear in its true 
colors. These characteristics, added to personal grounds 
of dislike, have given a peculiar acrimony to Spenser's 
satire. 

This theological discussion reflects the spirit of the con- 
troversies which disturbed Cambridge during the poet's 
connection with the University, and consists of the same 

«» Cf. pp. 181-8. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 73 

kind of language which he must have heard every day. 
Its most important features I will briefly indicate. In the 
first place, Piers, who begins the fray, is attacking a set of 
pastors who have charge of flocks, or, in other words, who 
enjoy livings in the Church : 

" Those f aj'tours little regarden their charge." 

(I. 39) 

They are something more than the Catholic priests who 
possessed no benefices and who wandered about the country 
seeking the protection of influential Catholics. In the 
second place, it is important to remember that Piers 's sys- 
tem of attack, which pretends to denounce the Catholics, is 
precisely the method pursued by the Puritans in their 
assaults on the Anglican Church. To them the Church of 
England, especially in its government and ceremonies, 
retained a large mixture of "Popishness", and they ac- 
cordingly applied to the bishops the hated attributes of 
Catholicism. At the distance of more than three centuries 
their prevailing language might easily lead the inexperi- 
enced to believe that they were assailing the Catholic hier- 
archy. It is clear that this method came conveniently to 
Spenser's hand, for he could attack the Anglican clergy in 
the most approved Puritan fashion and then allow E. K. 
to disavow his purpose by means of Catholic references. 

In his opening remarks Piers censures the carelessness 
of those pastors who do not regard the welfare of their 
flocks (11. 39-40) and who lead licentious lives (11. 41-42). 
From their behavior it is plain, he says, that 

" theyr sheepe bene not their owne," 

(1. 45) 

and then he proceeds to the heart of the matter by striking 
at the owners of the sheep, the patrons who sell the livings 
in their right of presentation to the highest bidder : 



74 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" But they bene hyred for little pay 
Of other, that caren as little as they 
What fallen the flocke, so they han the fleece, 
And get all the gayne, paying but a peece." 

(11. 49-50) 

This species of corruption, as we have seen, was prevalent 
in the Church, and the chief offenders were the men highest 
in power. Archbishop Parker flagrantly abused the dis- 
pensation system by admitting children to cures provided 
adequate fees were paid;®® much of Leicester's wealth was 
made through the practice of mulcting benefices ; and even 
Burghley was not above such dealings.^" Of the irregu- 
larities in the lives of the orthodox clergy the Puritans 
never ceased to complain; of the equally reprehensible 
fleecing of Church property they had less to sayJ^ This 
curious fact arose from their peculiar point of view of 
making the bishops responsible for all manner of Church 
corruption, and probably also from the knowledge that 
their patrons at Court, Leicester, for instance, often lay 
open to such charges. At a little later period Spenser did 
not hesitate to speak out even more plainly : 

" These be the wayes by which without reward 
Livings in Court be gotten, though full hard; 
For nothing there is done without a fee: 
The Courtier needes must recompenced bee 
With a Benevolence, or have in gage 
The Primitias of your Parsonage: 
Scarse can a Bishopriek forpas them by, 
But that it must be gelt in privitie." 

(M.H.T., 11. 513-20) 

~ Froude, XI, p. 100. 

■"•Strype, Parker, II, p. 431; Annals, II, pt. 1, p. 85, and pt. 2, 
appendix xxi. 

" This is condemned by Edward Bering in a letter to Burghley 
(1570), in Strype, Parker, III, pp. 219-25; and by Cartwright in the 
Second Beply, pp. 133, 147, 297-8, 371-2. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 75 

The meaning of Piers is the same ; it is merely less explicit. 
The answer of Palinode (11, 55-72) embodies the usual 
carpe diem reasons for present enjoyment. It is a spe- 
cious defence of the lives and actions of the Anglican 
ecclesiastics, and, judging from the manner in which they 
despoiled the Church property committed to their charge, 
probably represents their philosophy : 

" What shoulden shepheards other things tend, 
Then, sith their God his good does them send, 
Reapen the fruite thereof, that is pleasure, 
The while they here liven at ease and leasure?" 

(11. 63-6) 

Bishop Aylmer, who said that he would never deprive a 
clergyman merely for adultery, could have been actuated 
by no other philosophy. 

Piers then enters upon a more detailed condemnation 
(11. 73-131) of the lives of the Anglican clergy, quoting 
Grindal as his authority (1. 75). The first abuse which he 
attacks (11. 73-102) is the avaricious agglomeration of 
riches by the "shepheards" for the benefit of their families. 
The gist of the argument is as follows: clergymen should 
not regulate their lives by the same principles as laymen 
(11. 75-6), who feel compelled to provide for the material 
welfare of their heirs that the latter may not suffer an 
impaired social position (11. 77-80) ; a minister must pur- 
sue less worldly aims (11. 81-2) ; if his son leads a pure life, 
God will "cherish" him, and the father therefore has no 
need to bequeath him an inheritance (11. 83-6)'^^; if, on the 
other hand, the son falls into wicked courses, his patrimony 
will avail him little, for he will soon dissipate it (11. 87- 
90) ; the present day Churchmen seek only to amass riches, 

" The word ' ' spard ' ' was a technical term constantly applied to 
the prelates' heaping up of riches for their children, cf. Froude, XII, 
p. 22. 



76 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

proceedings which in the end produce misfortune (11. 91- 
4) ; their doings may be compared to the ''foolish care" of 
the Ape^^ who encompasses the destruction of her offspring 
through misplaced zeal for its welfare (11. 95-102). 

This clerical abuse, only too common at the time when 
Spenser wrote, lay open to the bitter taunts of the Puri- 
tans, and was sadly acknowledged by bishops and states- 
men, even by some of the very men who were the worst 
offenders. A few quotations from Puritan and other writers 
will illustrate this point : 

*' As yet it is not lawf ull for her Maiestie to allot any lands 
nnto the maintenaunce of the minister, or the minister to live upon 
lands for this purpose allotted unto him, but is to content him 
selfe with a smal pention, and so small, as he have nothing to 
leave for his wife and children after him (for whom he is not to 
be careful but to rest on god's providence) and is to require no 
more but foode and raiment, that in poverty he might be answer- 
able unto our Saviour Christ and his apostles." {Jlay any 
Worke for Cooper, a Marprelate tract written about 1588'*) 

" The whole Clergy wold be restrayned from alienation of their 
lands, and from unreasonable lessees :''^ wastes of woods, and 
grants of reversions, and advowsons, to any persons; and 
namely, to their wives and children." (Extract from a paper 
drawn up by Lord Burghley in 1572^^) 

" The clergy being now married and having wives, did overmuch 
alienate their minds from the honest and careful duty to which 
they were bound to attend. The poor were left in their poverty. 
The ancient hospitality was no longer maintained. The ministers 
of the Church accepted and reserved the most part and portion 
of the yearly revenues of their dignities unto themselves, to the 

"Lyly in Pappe with an Hatchet, an answer to Marprelate, uses 
the same simile, cf. Marprelate Tracts (ed. Petheram), p. 39. 
" Ed. Petheram, p. 12, 
" Leases. 
"" Strype, ParTcer, II, p. 206. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 77 

slander of the whole estate of the clergy." (Extract from a Bill 
proposed in the Puritan Parliament of 1571'^''^) 

Archbishop Parker, who heaped benefices and lucrative 
leases upon his sons and who presented his wife with the 
"Duke's house", a valuable piece of Church property near 
Lambeth Palace,"^ is only the most prominent example of 
this abuse. The Puritanism of the passage in question (II. 
73-102) arises from the fact that Spenser openly attacked 
this species of corruption and that he used certain stock 
controversial words and phrases, such as "spard" and 
"heaping up waves of welth". Statesmen and even bish- 
ops lamented, and Parliament legislated against, these 
practices, but it remained for the Puritans to denounce 
them from the house-tops.''^ 

The second division of Piers 's speech (11. 103-131) is 
devoted to a brief history of the Church, and contains a 
comparison between the clergy of the Apostolic Church and 
their degenerate successors of the present day. This device 
had already been used by Petrarch and Mantuan, and had 
become conventional in the pastoral. In Spenser, however, 
the appeal of Piers to the authority of history is especially 
appropriate, for Cartwright and the early Puritan contro- 
versialists were never tired of insisting on the excellence 
of the early Church and its freedom from the abuses of 
later times. In the description of these first "shepheards" 
Piers points out that they enjoyed no incomes except what 
arose from the sheep, — i. e. except what their congregations 
might give them ; that they possessed no lands and no reve- 
nues ("fee in sufferaunce," 1. 106). The result was that 
the Church was not filled with place-seekers : 

" Froude, X, p. 196. 

" Strype, Parker, II, pp. 28, 387. 

" Notice the accusations made against Bishop Sandys and the 
Dean and Chapter of Worcester, in Strype, Annals, I, pt. 2, especially 
pp. 38-40. 



78 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" Nought having, nought feared they to f orgoe ;" 

(1. 110) 

The simplicity of their tastes enabled them to live at a small 
expense. This praise of the Biblical shepherds serves 
naturally as a foil to the poet's bitter censure of the im- 
moral clergy of the present day. The language in which 
this attack is couched emphasizes an important point : 

" But tract of time, and long prosperitie. 
That nouree of vice, this of insoleneie. 
Lulled the shepheards in such seeuritie. 
That, not content with loyall obeysaunee. 
Some gan to gape for greedie govemaunce. 
And match them selfe with mighty potentates. 
Lovers of Lordship, and troublers of states." 

(11. 117-123) 

The phrase in the last line, "lovers of Lordship", contains 
the key to the situation, and could emanate from no one but 
a Puritan. One of the objections which the Puritans urged 
most vehemently against the Anglican Church was the use 
by the bishops of the temporal title lord. In almost 
every Puritan writing of the time this feature appears. A 
few quotations will illustrate my point : 

" Touching their names and titles, he (Christ) putteth a differ- 
ence in these words : ' And they are called gi-acious lords ; but it 
shall not be so with you.' And so the argument may be framed 
as before, that, forasmuch as they are severed in titles, and that 
to the civil minister doth agree the title of gracious lords, there- 
fore to the ecclesiastical minister the same doth not agree. For, 
as it is fit that they whose offices cany an outward majesty and 
pomp should have names agreeable to their magnificence, so is it 
meet that those that God hath removed from that pomp and out- 
ward shew should likewise be removed from such swelling and 
lofty titles, as do not agree with the simplicity of the ministry 
which they exercise." (Extract from Cartwright's Reply (1573) 
to Whitgift's Answer to the Admonition, p. 11.) 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 79 

" And first, your titles of dignity, as ' lord's grace ', ' lord 
bishop ', ' honour ', etc., how repugnant they are to the scripture, 
everyone, that is not willingly blind, seeth." (Extract from 
An Answer to certain pieces of a sermon made at Paul's Cross, 
etc., hy Dr. Cooper, Bishop of Lincoln, 1572)^ 

" That rule and lordship shall not be among you, which God 
hath given in the kingdoms of this world. . . . You shall not ex- 
ercise any lordships over ' the heritage of God '. . . . Christ doth 
forbid that which in the commonwealth is lawful, but ambition 
and tyranny is lawful no where. . . . Christ forbiddeth to be 
called in title of honour, evtpyrjTrjs, * a good and gracious lord ' ; 
a name so far from ambition and tyranny, as the office of a 
bishop should be from a ' lordship ', . . . For the lordship of a 
bishop hath ever been a plague-sore in the state of a kingdom. 
. . . But now I have to answer many thoughts, which very easily 
will rise within you. You will muse first of the state of the 
primitive church; and think that Augustine, Ambrose, etc. were 
all bishops. . . . True it is they were bishops ; but this is as true, 
they were no lords, neither agreed with our bishops almost in any 
thing, save only names." (Extracts from a letter of Edward 
Bering to Lord Burghley, 1573 )^'^ 

" They (the Puritans) are marvellously offended that Bishops 
are called * lords ' and * honourable ', and think that those high 
titles are usurped against God's word ". . . . (Archbishop Parker 
to Lord Burghley, 1573)^2 

Anyone who M^ill take the trouble to read almost any 
Puritan writing before 1580 will notice that the objection 
to the title of 'lord' is always urged sooner or later. 

Indeed the whole of the passage quoted (11. 117-23) is 
so pointed that E. K. feels called on to venture a lame ex- 
planation. In the gloss to "some gan" he remarks that 
this passage is "meant of the Pope, and his Antichristian 

*° Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, p. 295. 

^ Ibid., pp. 400-413. This letter is devoted almost entirely to an 
attack upon the pomp and titles of the bishops. 
»' Strype, Parker, II, p. 285. 



80 SPENSER 'S shepherd's CALENDER 

prelates, which usurpe a tyrannical dominion in the Churche, 
and with Peters couterfet keyes open a wide gate to al 
wickednesse and insolent government. Nought here spoken, 
as of purpose to deny fatherly rule and governaunce (as 
some maliciously of late have done, to the great unreste 
and hinderaunce of the Churche) but to displaye the pride 
and disorder of such, as, in steede of feeding their sheepe, 
indeede, feede of theyr sheepe." This remark, in accord- 
ance with the aim of Spenser professed in the "argument" 
of the eclogue, may be partly true, but it expresses less than 
half the truth. The concluding phrase, which is directed at 
the unworthy ministers who fleece their benefices instead 
of preaching to their flocks, does not easily lend itself to 
a Catholic interpretation ; if E. K. had really thought that 
Spenser was denouncing the Pope and his prelates, he 
would have expressed himself more vigorously. It is merely 
necessary to refresh our minds on the Puritan vocabulary 
to see whom Spenser was stigmatizing. The following is 
an extract from a Puritan protestation drawn up in 1573, 
to which every member of the congregation had to sub- 
scribe: "for in the church of the traditioners (Anglicans), 
there is no other discipline than that which hath been main- 
tained by the Antichristian Pope of Rome".®^ In a work 
entitled A view of Antichrist, his laws, and ceremonies in 
our English Church,^*" the Archbishop of Canterbury's 
descent is traced from Ambition, Simony, and the Pope, 
he is called the "Pope of Lambeth", and detailed parallels 
are drawn between him and the "Pope of Rome". The 
author also proceeds to draw up "an hundred points of 
popery remaining" in the Anglican Church. To the 
Puritan this Church of Elizabeth and Burghley savored of 

«* lUd., p. 283. 

"It was composed by the celebrated Puritan divine, Anthony Gilbj, 
and was published about 1578, though written before 1575. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 81 

"Antichrist's stench".*^ It is therefore not surprising to 
find that both Spenser and E. K. are here thinking of the 
Anglicans. The latter 's disclaimer of those who "mali- 
ciously of late" have denied "fatherly rule and govern- 
aunce" probably refers to the Anabaptists, with whom the 
Puritans disclaimed any connection. This sect, which was 
composed principally of German and Dutch exiles, held, 
among other doctrines, that ' ' no Christian man ought to be 
a magistrate" and that it was "not lawful for a Christian 
man to take an oath".^^ In other words, they denied the 
authority of the Queen and the bishops. For holding these 
and similar opinions two Anabaptists were burned at 
Smithfield on the 22nd of July, 1575, and nine others suf- 
fered perpetual banishment.^^ As the opponents of the 
Puritans often imputed such beliefs to them,*^ E. K. was 
compelled to deny any support of views which enemies 
might stretch into professions of Anabaptism. 

The conclusion of Piers 's diatribe (11. 124-31) contains 
an application of the parable found in the tenth chapter 
of St. John, a favorite pastoral device of the Humanists : 

" Tho, under colour of shepheards, somewhile 

There crept in Wolves, ful of fraude, and guile, 

That often devoured their owne sheepe, 

And often the shepheards that did hem keepe : " 

(11. 126-9) 

Although the poet is inaccurate, the general drift of his 
satire is evident. The "Wolves" who enter into the sheep- 
fold disguised as shepherds devour "their owne" sheep. 

'^Strype, Ajmals, II, pt. 1, p. 290. 

»^Neal, I, pp. 137-138; Campbell, I, p. 469. 

^ Elizabeth at this time wanted to propitiate Philip and to show 
him that she was extirpating heresy. 

**Neal, I, pp. 122, 124; Whitgift's Answer and Defence of the 
Answer, passim. 
7 



82 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

But they also make away with the shepherds in charge 
of these sheep. If the "Wolves" were not disguised as 
shepherds, we might consider them the lay patrons of 
benefices who sold their advowsons. On the other hand, 
if Spenser is interpreted strictly, the "Wolves" cannot 
be those corrupt ministers who neglect the welfare of their 
flocks, for these flocks already have pastors whom the 
"Wolves" devour. It seems impossible, therefore, to ex- 
tract anything more than a general meaning from this 
passage. The word wolf was applied to any enemy of the 
Church in the controversial language of the day. By this 
term the Puritans designated the false teachers of the 
Anglican Church,^"* the "papists",^" and those who preyed 
upon ecclesiastical property.®^ Owing to the grammatical 
inconsistencies in Spenser's description it is probable that 
he was thinking of all these meanings. 

Palinode's angry reply to the strictures of Piers is 
further proof, if such were needed, that he is meant to 
represent the Anglican clergy. The opening sixteen lines 
of his retort require no comment; they are merely a per- 
sonal answer. The remainder is a development of his 
earlier philosophy (11. 63-7) : let me and my brother 
Churchmen enjoy our livings, now that political conditions 
are settled; the evil day, when we shall be cast out, may 
come at any time,"^ and let us therefore make hay while 
the sun shines and lay by something for our use out of our 
livings : 

" While times enduren of tranquillitie, 
Usen we freely our felieitie; 

*° Cartwright, Second Beply, p. 373; Strype, FarTcer, I, p. 435. 

^ Cf. writings of Wm. Turner, cited below, p. 127. 

"^ The ' ' concealers ' ' are often called wolves ; cf. Zurich Letters 
(1), p. 299. 

^^ The succession of a Catholic sovereign in the person of Mary 
Stuart. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 83 

For, when approachen the stormie stowres, 
We mought with our shoulders beare of the sharpe 
showres ; " 

(11. 154-7) 

If the Anglican clergy did not openly declare these motives 
of conduct from the pulpit, their actions announced what 
their thoughts concealed. ''The Bishops . . . lived as if 
they knew their day to be a short one, and made the most 
of their opportunities while they lasted. Scandalous 
dilapidation, destruction of woods, waste of the property 
of the see by beneficial lease, the incumbent enriching him- 
self and his family at the expense of his successors — this is 
the substantial history of the Anglican hierarchy, with a 
few honorable exceptions, for the first twenty years of its 
existence.""^ The older Churchmen who had weathered 
the changes of religion in the reign of Henry VIII, Edward 
VI, and Mary had seen the pendulum swing too often from 
one side to the other not to suppose it would never swing 
again.**^ Elizabeth's friendliness towards Spain in 1576 
was felt even by her most intimate advisers to be actuated 
by a genuine desire to return within the Catholic fold. 
What concerns us here, however, is that Palinode is utter- 
ing conventional Anglican views. His remarks could under 
no circumstances be applied to the Catholics, for, although 
avowed Catholics still held livings, they could have scarcely 
looked upon a Protestant usurpation as a time of "tran- 
quillitie. ' 

Palinode concludes his speech with an argument for 
peace (11. 158-63). He pleads for what the newspapers 
now call "harmony" when they refer to political conven- 
tions. The split in the Protestant ranks between Anglicans 

°'Froude, XI, p. 100, cited above. 

^Cf. the remark of Provost Baker of King's College: "that which 
hath bin may be againe" (Leigh^ History of King's College, p. 61). 



84 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

and Puritans serves only to "layen her faults the world 
beforne", with the result that their enemies, the Catholics 
(1. 160), laugh at both of them and foster this spirit of 
dissension. This plea appears constantly in the Anglican 
writings of the time. Listen to Whitgift: "It is very true 
and sufficiently proved in that Answer to the Admonition, 
that the authors thereof (i. e. of the Admonition) be con- 
tentious, and 'give occasion to the papists of slandering 
the religion' professed. . . . For whosoever troubleth the 
peace of the Church, or divide themselves from the church 
for external things, they be contentious.""^ This philos- 
ophy runs through many of the letters of the Anglican 
divines written to their friends in Switzerland, Gualter, 
Bullinger, and Beza. Piers, however, repudiates Palinode's 
advances; his way he considers "the right way" (1. 165), 
and he would rather have Palinode and his party as enemies 
than as hike- warm friends who do not share his convictions 
(11. 166-7). To the Puritans, who looked upon the present 
Church regime as "the reign of Antichrist", the ortho- 
dox clergy appeared little less than Romanists, with whom 
they could have no "concord" (1. 168). This bitter reply, 
however, is brushed aside by Palinode, whose curiosity is 
aroused by the reference to the "Foxe" and the "Ejdde", 
and upon his eager request Piers recites this enigmatical 
fable. 

So far as I am aware, although solutions must have arisen 
in the minds of various students of Spenser, no careful 
attempt to elucidate the meaning of this fable has up to 
this time appeared in print. Perhaps no satisfactory solu- 
tion is possible, and yet in view of Spenser's evident dis- 
content with the Anglican Church, nurtured by his resi- 
dence at Cambridge, at that time one of the greatest hot- 
beds of Puritanism in the kingdom, some adequate solution 

'^Answer to the Reply of Cartwright, in Whitgift, Works, I, p. 40. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 85 

ought not to be impossible. E. K. indeed points the way ; 
he feels compelled to offer a harmless explanation of his 
friend's fable, forseeing that Spenser had laid himself 
open to the charge of circulating dangerous opinions. This 
is his interpretation : ' ' This tale is much like to that in 
JSsops fables, but the Catastrophe and end is farre differ- 
ent. By the Kidde may be understood the simple sorte of 
the faythfull and true Christians. By hys dame Christe, 
that hath alreadie with careful watche-words (as heer doth 
the gote) warned her little ones, to beware of such doubling 
deceit. By the Foxe, the false and faithless Papistes, to 
whom is no credit"® to be given, nor felowshippe''® to be 
used." I do not intend to enter upon the relations of this 
tale with earlier fable literature. Such a fable as Spenser 's 
may be found not only in Aesop"^ to be sure, but in almost 
any collection, such as The Seven Sages and the Fables of 
Bidpai. The influence of the Kenard cycle of poems, more 
striking in the Mother Huhherd's Tale, is also apparent, 
especially in the description of the Fox's disguise. The ex- 
ample of this kind of poetry with which Spenser was prob- 
ably best acquainted must have been Chaucer's Nonnes 
Preeste's Tale. The catastrophe, however, in these parallels 
is "farre different", for unlike Spenser's their ending is 
usually happy. The realistic element becomes so strong in 
Chaucer that the poor widow, her daughters, various men, 
and several domestic animals join in pursuit of the fox. 
In Spenser, on the other hand, we can never forget that the 
Fox, the Goat, and the Kid are not animals. As little at- 
tempt is made to preserve natural truth as in the Renard 
poems, and the veil which seeks to disguise human beings 
or institutions is of the thinnest texture. The interest of 

** The ' ' credit ' ' and ' * f elowshippe ' ' are repetitions taken from 
the ' ' argument ' '. 

*' Fable 9, bk. 2, reprint of Caxton 's edition. 



86 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

this fable lies chiefly in its application as an illustration of 
the ecclesiastical opinions of Piers and his party. 

Assuming E. K. 's interpretation of the allegory to be true, 
the Goat becomes Christ, the Kid "the faythfull and true 
Christians", and the Fox the "false Papistes". Although 
no difficulty is experienced in accepting the allegory of 
Christ in the person of the female Goat, for this proceeding 
finds parallels elsewhere in Spenser,^^ the real obstacle to 
E. K.'s explanation arises at once. If the Goat represents 
Christ, who is the husband whom she describes at length 
(11. 193-206) ? E. K. does not throw any light upon this 
point. Either his interpretation was hurriedly made, or 
else it is a " blind ' '. In each case it is clumsy, for it seems 
impossible to overcome the difficulty which arises in the 
shape of the Kid's father. In view of the controversy be- 
tween Piers and Palinode the first opinion is more apt to 
be correct, and that neither E. K. nor Spenser nor Harvey 
thought it worth while to change this interpretation is 
equally apparent. The fact is, however, that E. K.'s inter- 
pretation requires to be interpreted itself. If we make 
Christ the father of the Kid, and if we adopt the true 
Church of Christ as the Goat, our path becomes clearer. 
Precedents for this proceeding occur frequently in the 
Bible, where Christ appears as the Bridegroom of the 
Church. From the introductory statement of Piers (11. 
170-1) we know that the Kid represents his party and the 
Fox the party of Palinode. Upon translation E. K.'s 
language means that the Kid stands for the Puritans, "the 
faythful and true Christians" who sought a return to the 
simplicity of the Church in the time of the Apostles, and 
that the Fox symbolizes the Anglican Church and clergy, 
which retained so large an admixture of Romanism in the 

°' The best known example is in the Mother Hubberd's Tale, p. 521, 
where Queen Elizabeth is represented by the ' ' Lyon ' '. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 87 

eyes of Protestant enthusiasts. This explanation, it seems 
to me, arises naturally from the trend of the controversy 
between the two shepherds and from the conventional in- 
terpretation which E. K. offers. Spenser, the member of a 
University whose academic calm was constantly disturbed 
by active resistance to authority, by bitter denunciations, 
and by tumultuous expulsions, has taken up the cudgels 
in behalf of his party, and has treated the Anglicans to a 
thinly disguised attack in this, the most Puritan of all his 
eclogues. 

Although Spenser's interest in his art, especially notice- 
able in the detailed description of the Fox, and his wish to 
emulate Chaucer probably outweighed other motives in the 
composition of this fable, a desire to warn the Puritan 
party against trusting in the promises of the Anglicans 
also actuated him. The Puritans considered themselves the 
legitimate offspring of Christ and the Apostolic Church, 
and Spenser's allegory of the Kid's parentage is therefore 
in keeping with Puritan beliefs. Taking up the contents 
of the fable in some detail, the departure of the Goat to the 
"greene wood", 

" To brouze, or play, or what shee thought good :" 

(1. 179) 

indicates a possible or threatened withdrawal of the Puri- 
tans from the sound principles upon which they based their 
disapproval of the Anglican Church. So long as we Puri- 
tans, says the poet, preserve in our minds the image of the 
Apostolic Church, we will be exposed to no danger, for 
God will protect us ; if we lose sight of this ideal, however, 
we will be in danger of falling a prey to the Antichristian 
dealings of the Anglicans. To the advice which the Goat 
gives to her "young son" before she leaves him (11. 215- 
228), the Kid pays scant attention, and therefore falls an 



88 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

easy victim to the wiles of the Fox. By this catastrophe 
Spenser probably intended to warn the Puritans against 
submission to the injunctions of the bishops, which had 
been strongly enforced during the last years of Archbishop 
Parker's life (1571-75). In the year 1572 "one hundred 
clergymen were deprived . . . for refusing to subscribe"®^ 
the Thirty-Nine Articles. On October 2 of that year Field 
and Wilcox, the authors of the Admonition, had been 
imprisoned. In the next few years many other prominent 
Puritan divines were suspended from their livings and 
imprisoned. Puritan pamphlets were confiscated, and 
orders were issued for the apprehension of Cartwright, 
which precipitated his departure from the realm in Decem- 
ber, 1573.^''° In 1574 the Queen commanded the cessation 
of the ''prophesyings", as we have already seen. These 
proceedings are reflected in Cambridge by the vigorous 
actions of the Anglican authorities, whose power was so 
much augmented by the new statutes. On the accession of 
Grindal to the archbishopric in February, 1576, however, 
a perceptible lull occurred in the prosecution of the 
Puritans. 

Now Spenser, who was cognizant of these proceedings 
and conditions, writing about 1575-6, is exhorting the Puri- 
tans to resist and to remain outside the Anglican Church 
system, which was trying to engulf them, and which would 
not reward them for submission. I believe that the poet 
here, as elsewhere, points to specific abuses. The unfortu- 
nate interest which the Kid shows for the "glasse" (1. 
274) and the "bell" (1. 288), classified by E. K. among the 
Fox-Pedler's "reliques and ragges of popish supersti- 
tion ",^°^ is intended to warn the Puritans against the 

»« Neal, I, pp. 121 ff. 
""Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 361. 
"' Gloss to 1. 240. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 89 

acceptance of vestments, organs, crucifixes, fonts, painted 
windows, and other articles retained in the Anglican 
Church which savoured of Catholicism.^"- After the man- 
ner of Cartwright and his supporters at Cambridge he 
bids the members of his party to present an unbroken 
phalanx to the Church policy of the Queen and Burghley, 
and to distrust any promises of conciliation which may be 
held out to them. Such, it seems to me, in view of the 
points discussed by Piers and Palinode, and in view of the 
identity of the latter 's party with the Fox, is the correct 
solution of Spenser's fable. And when we remember that 
by Palinode Spenser means Dr. Perne, the Anglo-Catholic 
Cambridge official, the utility of Catholic terms for de- 
nouncing Anglicans is brilliantly illustrated. 

This purpose of Spenser is so apparent that the question 
arises whether he had any further intention. To his con- 
temporaries who were accustomed to the language of the 
Puritans E. K. 's attempts to divert the satire to the Catho- 
lics must have appeared feeble. In that controversial 
period no one would have believed that the writer was not 
attacking the Anglicans. At the same time one must feel 
that his satire is pretty general, and that therefore it forms 
an exception to his other fables, if he failed to represent 
anything more than classes of people. The question there- 
fore arises: is there anything either in the fable or in E. 
K. 's gloss which indicates that Spenser is thinking of indi- 
viduals? It seems to me that there are two places which 
remain unsatisfactorily explained either by the actual inci- 
dents of the narrative or by the satire on the Anglicans. 
The first is in 1. 191, containing the word "Orphane", to 
which E. K. attaches the following meaning: "Orphane, a 
youngling or pupill, that needeth a tutour or governour". 
The second is in the speech of the Fox : 

"*One has only to read Cartwright to see the importance which the 
thorough-going Puritans attached to these objects. 



90 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" And, if that my Grandsire me sayd be true, 
Sicker, I am very sybbe to you : " 

(11. 268-9) 

The commentator explains "sybbe" as "of kinne". Per- 
haps E. K,, in an attempt to parade his knowledge, extends 
the meaning of the word "Orphane"; perhaps Spenser is 
filling up the conversation of the Fox with colloquial bits 
of chit-chat. In view of the poet's prevailing tendency to 
satirize particular persons, and especially in view of the 
same kind of comments in the February eclogue, where 
they are more numerous, I believe that Spenser and E. K. 
are throwing out hints. To what these may point it is 
almost impossible to discover for certain, but I think that 
an explanation is demanded by the circumstances, and I 
therefore am prepared to advance one. 

Turning our attention to the Fox, we know that Spenser 
elsewhere satirizes Burghley under the figure of this 
animal. The view that Burghley is the Fox of the second 
episode of the Mother Huhberd's Tale has been long con- 
sidered true^"^ and has received fresh illustration in a 
newly published article."* In The Ruines of Time, towards 
the conclusion of the vindication of Leicester, the same 
application occurs: 

" He now is gone, the whiles the Foxe is crept 
Into the hole, the which the Badger swept." 

(11. 216-7) 

The former poem was not composed before the summer of 
1579 probably, on account of its reference to Leicester's 
marriage with the Countess of Essex (1. 628) of which the 
Queen remained ignorant until that time ; that portion of 
the latter poem with which we are concerned could not 

^°* Grosart, Spenser, I, pp. 84-9. 

"*E. A. Greenlaw, Fubl. Mod. Lang. Ass. (September, 1910), 
XXV, pp. 535-61. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 91 

have been written until some time after September, 1588, 
when Leicester died. After a lapse of over ten years 
Spenser still clung to his original figure for Burghley, and 
there is nothing to indicate that he so used it for the first 
time in the Mother Hubherd's Tale}^^ On account of this 
later use and on account of the strong Puritan bias of 
Spenser's satire, which attacks the Anglican Church and, 
therefore, Burghley as the chief regulator of its policy 
after the Queen, it is reasonable to believe that the Fox in 
this eclogue designates that statesman. This view also has 
probably been held by many people, and it may be thought 
surprising that I did not present it at once in my discussion 
of this fable My answer is not far to seek. As long as the 
other chief actor of this miniature drama, the Kid, is held 
to represent a class of men or an institution, it is better to 
treat the other principal figure, the Fox, in the same man- 
ner, and not to attempt to distinguish between the Anglican 
Church and the individual who symbolized its power. As 
soon as this distinction is made, we must grapple with per- 
sonalities and must identify the Kid and also the Goat with 
particular individuals, a task weighted with difficulty. 
However, as I believe that Spenser is using that kind of 
allegory with a double meaning so characteristic of the 
Faerie Queene, I shall attempt these identifications. 

On September 22, 1576, Walter Devereux, first Earl of 
Essex of that name, died in Ireland, after his ill-starred 
efforts to colonize Ulster had met with nothing but failure. 
Although Burghley in his capacity as Master of the Court 
of Wards could have laid claim to the wardship of this 

"^ In August, 1571, the Spanish Ambassador wrote: "tell his 
Majesty that Cecil is a fox cunning as sin" (Froude, X, p. 258). 
In the portraits of Burghley, especially in the one contained in Lodge 's 
Portraits, one can trace a certain fox-like resemblance in his counte- 
nance. Both from his actions and his appearance Burghley must have 
offered an excellent comparison to a fox. 



92 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

nobleman's young heir, Robert Devereux, subsequently the 
favorite of Elizabeth, he was not obliged to resort to such a 
proceeding. The late Earl had more than once expressed 
a desire that his son might be educated in Burghley's 
household. On November 1, 1573, he had written from 
Ireland to the Lord Treasurer, proposing a marriage be- 
tween the young Robert, then nearly six years of age, and 
the Lady Elizabeth Cecil, Burghley's younger daughter, 
and in return for 100 or 200 marks Burghley was to have 
"the direction", and superintend the education, of the 
l3Qy 106 rpj^-g jiiarriage proposal fell through, for there is 
no future reference to it either in the Hatfield correspond- 
ence or in the State Papers. In another letter, however, 
written the day before he died, the Earl repeated his re- 
quest that Robert might be brought up in Burghley's 
household.^"'^ On January 11, 1577, accordingly, young 
Essex left Chartley in Staffordshire, the family seat, where 
he had been living with his mother, the former Lettice 
Knollys and the future Countess of Leicester, and took up 
his residence with Burghley.^"^ By May 13 of that year 
he had been sent to Trinity College, Cambridge, although 
he did not matriculate until July 1, 1579.^°^ The Christmas 
vacation of 1577 he spent at the Court in London, subse- 
quently visiting the Earl of Leicester at Wanstead (Essex) 
on his return to the University. ^^° In October, 1578, after 
he had spent the summer vacation at Chartley, his tutor, 
Robert Wright, informed Burghley that he had removed 
the young Earl to Newington on account of the plague in 

106 -^ -Q Devereux, Lives and Letters of the Devereux, I, pp. 43-4. 

""Ibid., p. 144. 

"' Ibid., p. 166. 

'"* Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 296. 

""Leicester married the mother of Essex in the summer of 1578 at 
Kenilworth; the marriage was solemnized again on September 21, 
1578, at Wanstead in the presence of witnesses. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 93 

Cambridge.^^^ "The letters of Essex at this period seldom 
consist of more than a few lines: those to Lord Burghley 
are usually in Latin. "^^- Finally, on July 6, 1581, he re- 
ceived the honorary degree of Master of Arts, commonly 
bestowed on noblemen without the requirement of the usual 
course of study, and soon afterwards withdrew to his resi- 
dence at Lanfey in Pembrokeshire/^^ These are the main 
incidents in the early life of Essex of which we possess any 
knowledge. The points which I wish to emphasize are that 
Burghley became the guardian of the young Earl and that 
a match had been proposed between him and Elizabeth 
Cecil. This lady became the wife of Thomas "Wentworth 
in February, 1582, and was unfortunate enough to lose her 
husband the same year.^^* 

What I have to suggest is that the May fable may also 
refer to these relations between Burghley and Essex, the 
circumstances of which fit the incidents of the poem. The 
Goat, a widow who is about to be separated from her 
' ' youngling ' ', imparts to him the following advice : 

"'Kiddie, (quoth shee) thou kenst the great care 
I have of thy health and thy welfare, 
Which many wyld beastes liggen in waite 
For to entrap in thy tender state : 
But most the Foxe, maister of collusion :' " 

(11. 215-19) 

As we have seen, Walter Devereux died on September 22, 
1576, and his son remained at Chartley with his mother 
until January 11, 1577, when he left to become a member 
of Burghley 's household. At this parting his mother must 
have cautioned him to beware of Court sycophants and 

^ Cal. Hatfield MSS., ii, pp. 207-8, 215. 

"^ Lives of the Devereux, I, p. 170. 

^" Ibid., p. 171. 

"* Nares, Burghley, III, pp. 178-79. 



94 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

parasites, and especially of any noblemen or other persons 
who should attempt to marry him to their daughters. The 
description of the Goat's husband, whose days had been 
"cutte of" "with untimely woe" (1. 199) and who had 
been betrayed "into the traines of hys foe" (1. 200), ex- 
actly fits the case of Lord Essex, who died in Ireland sur- 
rounded by enemies. The chivalrous character of this 
nobleman, who was unsatisfied to pass his days idly at home, 
who spent the bulk of his fortune in the service of his 
ungrateful mistress, and in whose Irish camp no oaths 
were heard, may well have aroused the interest of the young 
poet. Among the noblemen and politicians of the day 
Spenser could have found no nobler ideal for all that he 
held best in life. 

The disastrous end of the Kid, as I have already pointed 
out, is evidently a warning. In the present connection the 
poet may have intended to show the perils which would 
beset the young Earl from an intimacy with Burghley, 
through the latter 's conjectured desire either to snatch him 
up for his daughter or to enrich himself from the adminis- 
tration of his property. The motive for such a satire may 
be found in Burghley 's unpopularity, especially at Cam- 
bridge, and in the fact that libels upon his affairs, private as 
well as public, were scattered broad-cast over England.^^^ 
In the University, matters relating to his private life must 
have furnished as much food for idle speculation and vul- 
gar gossip as the lives of some academic officials afford at 
the present day. 

Although I believe that Spenser composed the greater 
part of his ecclesiastical eclogues during his connection 
with the University, and although Essex did not become an 

"° Anyone who cares to look through the State Paper Calendars of 
Elizabeth's reign will see to what an extent these libels were circu- 
lated. Froude, XII, p. 149, gives a sort of epitome of the prevailing 
reports. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 95 

orphan until September, 1576, when the poet had left col- 
lege, it is possible that he re-touched this fable about 1579 
when E. K. added the commentary, wishing to attach a 
secondary meaning to his satire. That he knew the young 
Essex at this time it is impossible to say, yet he may have 
heard a great deal about him, even if he did not remain 
near Cambridge after graduation. Judging from those 
letters of his which we possess, Gabriel Harvey would not 
have failed to inform his friend of the residence of this 
young nobleman in Cambridge, who must have aroused 
great interest owing to his relationship with the Queen, ^^® 
to the sad fate of his father, and, last but not least, to the 
sumptuous kind of living thought necessary for his wel- 
fare.^" At any rate, in view of the poet's connection with 
Leicester, which probably originated in the summer of 
1578, Spenser had a good point on which to attack Burgh- 
ley and which he could weld into his already written fable 
by a few dexterous turns. The wardship of his own step- 
son, lying as it did in the hands of his enemy, must have 
been a thorn in Leicester's side. 

This solution of the fable solves the certain amount of 
obscurity which is attached to E. K.'s comment on the word 
"Orphane, a youngling or pupill, that needeth a tutour or 
governour". Young Robert certainly did need a tutor, 
and he had several, the principal one being Robert 
Wright."* The very fact that E. K. connects the words 

"° The mother of Essex was Lettice Knollys, daughter of Sir 
Francis Knollys by Catherine Carey, the daughter of William Carey 
and Mary, sister of Anne, Boleyn. Lady Knollys and Queen Eliza- 
beth were therefore first cousins, and the young Earl of Essex was the 
Queen's first cousin twice removed. 

"' Notice the accounts of his household expenses in Cooper, Annals, 
II, pp. 352-6. 

"* Wright matriculated as a sizar at Trinity College on May 2, 1567. 
He proceeded B.A. in 1570-71, was elected a fellow, and commenced 
M.A. in 1574 (Cooper, Atlienae, II, p. 223). He was therefore a con- 
temporary of Harvey, Kirke, and Spenser at Cambridge. 



96 SPENSER 'S shepherd's CALENDER 

"tutour" and Orphane is strong evidence that the Kid, 
who is represented by the latter, is meant to stand for an 
individual person. From his position as the ward of a man 
whom Spenser disliked, as a student at Cambridge while 
Harvey was still there and while Spenser's interest in Uni- 
versity affairs remained unabated, and as the son of one 
celebrated nobleman, who had suffered a pitiable fate, and 
the stepson of another, the poet's patron and the enemy of 
Burghley, the young Robert satisfies the allegorical descrip- 
tion of the Kid. 

As for the other remark (besides the one attaching to 
the word Orphane) which appears obscure without a 
further explanation than E. K. vouchsafes, and which pro- 
ceeds from the Fox, 

"And, if that my Grandsire me sayd be true, 
Sicker, I am very sybbe to you :" 

(11. 268-9) 

this acquires significance if attributed to Burghley. The 
great Cecil, in spite of the laborious researches of anti- 
quaries aided by his own efforts, one of whom was no less 
a person than "William Camden, could never clearly estab- 
lish his genealogy beyond his grandfather, David Cecil. 
This David, who emigrated from Herefordshire, first settled 
in the county of Lincoln, and subsequently removed to 
Stamford in Northamptonshire.^^^ Descent was claimed 
for him from the Sitsilts, Sicelts, or Seycils, a name vari- 
ously spelled, of Alterennes, near Ewyas Harold in Here- 
fordshire.^^** In the archives of Hatfield there are no less 
than nineteen genealogical tables in which Burghley 's pedi- 
gree is connected with the names of many great families, 
chiefly of Herefordshire and the adjacent counties. Among 
these the most illustrious are the Herberts, Percies, Wood- 

""Nares, Burghley, I, pp. 12-13. 
"° Ibid., pp. 8-9. 



THE MAY ECLOGUE 97 

villes, Baskervilles, Nevilles, Somersets, Howards, and 
Vauglians.^-^ Burghley's pretensions to a distinguished 
lineage were ridiculed by his enemies, who said that his 
grandfather was an inn-keeper/'^ Whatever the truth of 
these allegations may have been, it is sufficient to remem- 
ber that they were freely made ; likewise we have proof in 
these papers that Burghley claimed kinship with families 
of noble extraction. Now the young Earl of Essex was 
descended from Anne Woodville, sister of the Queen of 
Edward IV, through her daughter who married John 
Devereux, Lord Ferrers, his great-great-grandfather. Is it 
not reasonable to suppose that Burghley, when the young 
boy entered his household, may have pointed to this asserted 
relationship through the Woodvilles in a polite endeavor 
to make him feel at home? At any rate, it is known that 
Burghley professed to be related in this way to the 
Devereux, and his enemies would not have been slow to 
circulate the report that he claimed this "kinred" (1. 271), 
especially when the young Earl became his ward and when 
suggestions had been made that he might marry Elizabeth 
Cecil.^-^ In this light the remark of the Fox^-* that his 

^-'Cal. Hatfield MSS., viii, pp. 287-8, 553; Cal. State Papers, 
Dom., Add., ed. Green, p. 47. 

'- Even his latest biographer, Hume, is obliged to admit that David 
Cecil probably owned an inn (p. 7). 

"* In Elizabeth 's reign people used to purchase the custody of 
minors, the richer they were the better, whom they wished to marry to 
their children, and whom they often brought up in an ignorant con- 
dition in order that they might not look elsewhere for husbands or 
wives (H. Ellis, Original Letters, II, 2d s., pp. 320-1). The Duke 
of Norfolk acquired the wardship of the heiresses of Lord Dacres and 
married two of his sons to them. The Earl of Bedford secured the 
wardship of the young Earl of Cumberland and married him to his 
daughter. Burghley made a brilliant match from a worldly point of 
view for his daughter Anne, when he married her to his ward Edward 
Vere, Earl of Oxford. 

"*I do not wish to press arguments too far and therefore have 
8 



98 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

grandfather told him that he was related to the Kid be- 
comes intelligible. David Cecil died in 1536/-^ when "Wil- 
liam was sixteen years of age, and the grandfather in the 
full pride of his success as a self-made man may have 
boasted to his grandson of a connection with the distin- 
guished Devereux family of Hereford. The remark of the 
Fox, at any rate, requires an explanation, and this is the 
way in which I have undertaken to provide one. 

To sum up Spenser's treatment of political and eccle- 
siastical topics in the May eclogue, it is necessary to repeat 
the fact that this poem undoubtedly expresses his dissatis- 
faction with the Anglican Church, its constitution, and 
attendant corruptions, and with the policy of those who 
ruled it, and that this feeling arose from his residence in 
Cambridge and his association with men of Puritan opinions 
during a tumultuous period of revolt against academic and 
State authority. The particular persons whom he singled 
out for attack were Burghley and Perne, men whose lives 
had rendered them peculiarly suited to the pretended 
Romanist object of his satire, for they had both professed 
Catholicism in Mary's reign. Although this latter method 
now seems to have enjoyed the additional excellence of 
allowing Spenser to cover his tracks by openly pointing 
out through E. K. that he was attacking the Catholics, he 
could have deceived few contemporary readers, for all 
writers who used the methods and the language that he did 
were considered Puritans. This theory, which has perhaps 
occurred to other students of Spenser, may be advanced 
with a strong degree of certainty. The further attempt to 

relegated this comment to a foot-note. The Fox has the gout (11. 
243-4), a description for which there is no particular reason in this 
tale. But Burghley was constantly a victim to this painful disease in 
his later years (c/. especially Hume, Burghley, pp. 293-4) , and his 
affliction was everywhere known. 
^" Hume, Burghley, p. 7. 



THE JULY ECLOGUE 99 

connect the poet's satire with incidents in the lives of indi- 
viduals is sanctioned by his practice elsewhere in the 
Calender, which is vouched for by E. K.^-^ In view of 
this fact and in view of certain obscurities in the text and 
the gloss, it seemed advisable to offer a further explanation 
of the fable. Whether the solution here advanced, resting 
as it does on a slight basis of fact, will be acceptable to stu- 
dents of Spenser would be hazardous to say. That it 
satisfies the contents of the fable and that no lack of motive 
for the satire existed is all that may be safely claimed. 

(4) The July Eclogue 

The "July" is the only one of Spenser's ecclesiastical 
eclogues which has been satisfactorily explained even in 
part, although I believe that no one writer has offered a 
complete explanation of its contents. The two main points 
which have been clearly established is that Spenser's satire 
is directed against Bishop Aylmer in the person of the 
shepherd Morrell, while his praise is bestowed upon Arch- 
bishop Grindal, to whose sequestration he makes pointed 
reference in the fable of the Eagle and the Shell-fish. The 
importance of these explanations for the solution of the 
other fables lies in the fact that his satire is aimed at 
persons high in power, and that friendship or a sense of 
loyalty can at times outweigh the Puritan bias of his reli- 
gious opinions. 

The fable of the July eclogue, at any rate, could not 
have been composed before June, 1577, when Grindal was 
punished, and the main body of the eclogue not before 
March 22 of the same year, when Aylmer became Bishop of 
London,^^^ for his unpopularity among the Puritans dates 

"* Cf. the glosses to the September eclogue (1. 176) and to the 
* ' tale of Roffy ' ' immediately following. 

^^ A curious misprint occurs in Herf ord 's notes to this eclogue, 
where Aylmer is called Bishop of Cardon, an evident mistake for 
London. 



100 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

only from his accession to this dignity. The cautious 
manner in which Spenser and E. K. refer to Grindal makes 
it probable that the eclogue was completed soon after the 
Archbishop's disgrace, when the Queen's anger was 
greatest. 

Turning to the form of the eclogue, it is evident from 
our knowledge of Spenser's sources that he is using the 
motif of the debate between a lowland and an upland 
shepherd. In Boccaccio's Ameto this method is pur- 
sued without allegorical intention ; in Mantuan it is em- 
ployed as a medium of satire against the corruption of the 
higher Catholic clergy. It is the latter from whom Spen- 
ser has borrowed a large portion of his material, and 
under this form he has continued his attack upon the An- 
glican Church, and particularly upon those of its repre- 
sentatives entitled to be called "proude and ambitious 
Pastours". Bishop Aylmer was selected as that particular 
ecclesiast in whom the abuses of the Anglican Church most 
glaringly appeared. 

John Aylmer, Aelmer, Ailemer, Elmer, or Elmore, for 
his name is variously spelled, attained to a height of un- 
enviable notoriety in the ecclesiastical annals of his time. 
"Certain it is," says Sir John Harington,^-^ *'no bishop 
was more persecuted and taunted by the Puritans of all 
sorts than he was, by lybells, by scoffs, by open rayling, 
and privie backbiting." He was one of the principal 
marks at which Martin Marprelate directed the shafts of 
his wit, and "Dumb John of London" was his favorite 
epithet for the bishop. In early life Aylmer belonged to 
the ranks of the advanced Reformers. He had the honor 
of being tutor to Lady Jane Grey, the patronage of whose 
father he received, and was eventually appointed to the 
archdeaconry of Stow in 1553. Although he proceeded 

"^ Nvgae Antiquae, II, p. 35. 



THE JULY ECLOGUE 101 

B.A. in 1540-1, and M.A. in 1545, at Cambridge, it is 
uncertain to which college he belonged.^-^ Owing to his 
opinions he was deprived by Mary in 1553, and fled to the 
Continent. While abroad in Strasburg and Ziirich he 
assisted Fox in his compilation of the Acts and Monu- 
ments. Unfortunately for him, he also published an an- 
swer to A Blast against the Government of Women by 
John Knox (this was aimed at Queen Mary), in which 
he advanced some Puritanical view^s which he could never 
entirely explain away in after-life, and with which his en- 
emies never ceased to taunt him. At the beginning of 
Elizabeth's reign, through the influence of Burghley,^'"' he 
was advanced to the archdeaconry of Lincoln, a post in 
which he had an altercation with his superior. Bishop 
Cooper, over the temporalities of his office. Archbishop 
Parker, with the help of the Bishop of Winchester, ad- 
judicated the dispute in 1572 decidedly in Cooper's favor. 
Aylmer's grasping nature is further attested by Arch- 
bishop Sandys, who spoke of him to Burghley in this way : 
"coloured covetousness, an envious heart, covered with the 
coat of dissimulation, will, when opportunity serveth, shew 
itself ".^^^ This scathing comment was called forth by 
Aylmer's attempt to possess himself of the rents of the see 
of London from Michaelmas, 1576, on account of alleged 
dilapidations, although he had not been appointed until 
March 22, 1577. A suit arose between the two bishops 
which dragged along until 1584. Aylmer's notorious cor- 
ruption in regard to the administration of his see, espe- 
cially the felling of his woods at Fulham in 1577-79, which 
he was forced to acknowledge in the presence of the Privy 

"'Cooper in the Athenae mentions Queens' and King's. Strype 
in his Life of Aylmer, p. 2, mentions conjecturally Gonville, Corpus, 
and Trinity Hall. 

'^ Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 169. 

^" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, p. 48. This was cited above. 



102 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Council in May, 1579, rendered him an object of further 
aversion to his opponents.^^^ Immediately following his 
appointment he entered upon a campaign against the Puri- 
tans, depriving many of them of their livings,^ ^^ and on 
account of this policy, accounted additionally harsh in view 
of his former Puritan bia^, he excited a general feeling of 
disgust among the inhabitants of London. 

Such was the man whom Spenser marked out for his 
satire in the person of the shepherd Morrell. The question 
of the identity of the other interlocutor, Thomalin, I have 
discussed in another place, arriving at the conclusion that 
he represents Thomas Wilcox. Whether or not this view 
happens to be correct makes little difference as far as the 
satire of this eclogue is concerned. The Thomalin who 
acts as the mouth-piece of the poet's views is, at any rate, a 
thorough-going Puritan, and he has been selected as a 
striking representative of the ' ' good shepeheardes ' ' in con- 
trast to the "proude and ambitious Pastours: Such as 
Morrell is here imagined to bee".^^* 

The contents of this eclogue do not seem to me to be as 
important as those of the "February", "May", or 
"September". Its form, the debate between an upland 
and a lowland shepherd, and its close imitation of Man- 
tuan require more or less conventional following of well- 
beaten tracks. The attack on Morrell is made the more 
severe because he is called a "goteheard", E. K. tritely 
pointing out the allusion that "by Gotes, in scrypture, be 
represented the wicked and reprobate", and transferring 
the same qualities to their master. That there may be no 
mistake in regard to Spenser's meaning, E, K. proceeds to 
explain the word "banck" as "the seate of honor" or, in 

^*^Strype, Aylmer, pp. 46-8'. 

^^Ihid., pp. 21-2. 

"* In the ' ' argument ' ' of the eclogue. 



THE JULY ECLOGUE 103 

plain English, the bishop's throne. Two succeeding com- 
ments (11. 3 and 9) emphasize the attack on Aylmer through 
references to the false teaching given to his flock and to his 
"ambition". With the point of the satire clearly estab- 
lished, Spenser then leaves Church matters, and allows 
Morrell to expatiate upon the merits of the hills in close imi- 
tation of Mantuan (11. 33-92). Thomalin's reply offers 
nothing previously unknown to the pastoral. His speech 
falls naturally into three parts : the first division is a rustic 
defense of the "lowly dales" (11. 93-112), the second is an 
epitome of pre-Christian Church history (11. 112-168), still 
without active satirical purpose, which leads naturally, by 
an inferred comparison, to the corruption of the "pas- 
tours" of the present time (11. 169-204). 

Although Spenser is paraphrasing Mantuan in the 
second division of Thomalin's speech, the use of such a 
model is especially appropriate when we remember that 
he is transferring the original meaning to Aylmer and his 
Anglican colleagues. The full import of Thomalin 's method 
appears in the last division of his speech, when he attacks 
the corruption of the present clergy. Owing to the con- 
tinued imitation of Mantuan, anyone unacquainted with 
the Puritan literature of the time would imagine that 
Spenser was deriding only "the Popes and Cardinalles" 
of the Holy Catholic Church, as E. K. remarks. If this 
were true, Morrell, the Anglican Bishop of London, would 
have scant reason to grow angry. It is, of course, evident 
that Spenser is again shooting his darts at the Anglican 
hierarchy. Thomalin's opposition is based, in the first 
place, upon the lack of simplicity of these shepherds, espe- 
cially in matters of dress : 

" Their weedes bene not so nighly wore ; 
Such simplesse mought them shend:^^^ 

^'^ Disgrace, put to shame (Herford). 



104 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

They bene yclad in purple and pall, 
So hath theyr god them blist." 

(11. 171-4) 

The dissatisfaction of the Puritans with the Church of 
England was brought to a head in 1565 by the enforcement 
of the Act of Uniformity,' which led to the ' ' vestment con- 
troversy ' ' and to the deprivation of many clergymen, espe- 
cially in London, Their objections at this time, as we have 
seen, arose from their hatred of the habits which the clergy 
were commanded to wear. This feature appears in prac- 
tically all contemporaneous Puritan writings, and is speci- 
fied by Harvey in his epistolary remark on Cartwright,^'^^ 
while Spenser himself had witnessed the controversy at 
Cambridge between Cartwright and Whitgift, in which 
opposition to the habits played so important a part. A 
few quotations of the language of Puritan writers on this 
point will be interesting : 

" Copes, caps, surplices, tippets, and such like baggage, the 
preaching signs of popish priesthood, the pope's creatures." . . . 
( Cartwright's Reply) ^^^ 

" But they are as the garments of the idol, to which we should 
say, Avaunt, and get thee hence. They are as the garments of 
Balaamites, of popish priests, enemies to God and all Christians." 
(The same) 138 

In a letter written by Coverdale, Humphrey, and Samp- 
son (July, 1566) to the Swiss divines the habits are stig- 
matized as "the relics of the Amorites" and "the distinc- 
tive marks of Antichrist ".^^s ju g, letter of Whittingham, 
the Puritan Dean of Durham, they are called "Pope-like 
ornaments", "the defiled robes of Antichrist", and "Anti- 

^^ Harvey, WorTcs (Grosart), I, p. 71. 

"'Whitgift, WorTcs, II, p. 50. 

"* Ihid., p. 52. 

"^ Zurich Letters, 2d s., p. 123. 



THE JULY ECLOGUE 105 

christian pollution". ''Surely ... it may seem to be a 
very poor policy to think by this means {viz. by the vest- 
ments) to change the nature of superstition, or to deck 
the spouse of Christ with the ornaments of the Babylonian 
strumpet, or to force the true preachers to be like in out- 
ward shew to the Papists, Christ's enemies. ""° In view 
of the Puritan conventionality of attributing "Popish" 
names to the Anglicans and their ceremonies, no doubt con- 
cerning Spenser's purpose can exist. 

After the attack on their apparel, Thomalin proceeds to 
censure the princely living of the prelates : 

" They reigne and rulen over all, 
And lord it as they list : " 

(11. 175-6) 

He lashes the corrupt methods which they use in buying 
their sheep, viz. in gaining their bishoprics : 

" Theyr Pan theyr sheepe to them has sold, 
I saye as some have seene." 

(11. 179-180) 

We have seen that corrupt presentations had become a 
matter of course in Elizabeth 's day ; not only the courtiers, 
but even the Queen herself, continually practiced such 
dealings. Witness the vacancy created in the see of Ely 
after the death of Bishop Cox, because Elizabeth could get 
no cleric of note to accept it on the conditions which she 
imposed, involving as they did the alienation of a part of 
its lands. Thomalin here refers to the authority of one 
Palinode^*^ (1. 181), who has visited a place which he apoc- 
ryphally calls Rome. That Rome is not really intended is 

^^ Strype, Parker, III, p. 79 ff. 

'** This Palinode cannot be identical with the Palinode of the 
"May"; there, he is the object of Spenser's satire, here, he is the 
friend of Spenser's representative, Thomalin, 



106 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

made clear by the parenthetical phrase immediately fol- 
lowing: "if such be Rome" (1, 183). There would be no 
point to this insertion unless it were meant to warn the 
reader against a verbal interpretation. London is the city 
which Thoraalin has in mind, the head-quarters of ecclesias- 
tical authority, and in London Palinode has witnessed the 
sale of Church livings.^*^ There, he reported, the higher 
ecclesiastics lived as "Lordes done other where". The 
Puritans were never tired, as we have seen,^*^ of attacking 
the ' ' lordship ' ' of the bishops : ' ' Wee mean the lordly lords, 
archbishops, bishops, suffragans, deans, doctors, archdeacons, 
chancellors, and the rest of that proud generation: whose 
kingdom must down; hold they never so hard. Because 
their tyrannous lordships cannot stand with Christ his 
kingdom.""* The following is a curious attack on one of 
the Anglican bishops on account of his "lordly state and 
title : " " That living and revenue wherewith your state and 
the state of churchmen is maintained, is by some writers 
and good preachers of our time called patrimonium cruci- 
fixi. You do know that Christ his patrimony ought not 
to be bestowed on a sort and company of idle serving men, 
which do only serve the pomp of one person . . . this 
number and multitude of serving men is unprofitable and 
unmeet for a minister of Christ ... it doth bewray in you 
a desire and liking of lordly state: which is one of the 
great stains which Popery hath left behind in this Church 
of England.""^ And here is still another attack of the 
same kind, especially interesting because of its references 

^*^Cf. Mother Huiierd's Tale (Globe ed.), p. 517. 

**^ Cf., pp. 78-9. I offer quotations on this point again owing to 
its importance in the political doctrines of the Puritans. 

^** Admonition to the Farliament, extracts given by Strype, Annals, 
II, pt. 2, p. 476. 

""Letter of Thomas Sampson to the Archbishop of York, in Strype, 
Parker, III, pp. 319-23. 



THE JULY ECLOGUE 107 

to Biblical history similar to Thomalin 's : "For that you 
went about to prove these Antichristian titles, 'archbishop', 
'lord bishop', 'honour', 'grace', 'metropolitan', 'primate', 
etc., in ministers and preachers of the gospel, lawful, which 
indeed are altogether contrary to God's word. ... As for 
your joining civil offices to your ecclesiastical functions, 
how wicked that is, none that hath any taste or feeling of 
godliness can without horror and grief of conscience, con- 
sider. . . . And what an absurd thing is this too, to con- 
found those two several callings, which in all common- 
wealths, either of Gentiles or Jews (unless there hath been 
a very great disorder among them) have been sundered; 
and to appropriate them both to one person, which have 
been severally allotted to two! You see that Moses was 
God's magistrate, appointed to bear hard matters among 
the people, and to give sentence therein. And Aaron was 
the Lord's priest. ... So Joshua was the Lord's captain. 
. . . And Eleazer executed the charge and function of a 
priest. . . . And this much be generally spoken at this 
present, concerning those proud titles and unlawful 
offices. "^*« 

The third objection which Thomalin lodges against the 
shepherds of ' ' Rome ' ', and which is closely related to their 
use of pompous titles, is their heaping up of money at the 
expense of their flocks : 

" Theyr sheepe han crustes, and they the bread ; 
The chippes, and they the chei-e: 
They han the fleece, and eke the flesh, 
(0, seely sheepe, the while !)^^^ 
The come is theyrs, let other thresh, 
Their handes they may not file." 

(11. 187-92) 

^*^ An Answer . . . to a sermon . . . by Dr. Cooper (1572), in Strype, 
Annals, II, pt. 1, p. 295. 
"^ That the words * ' seely sheepe ' ' are constantly applied to the 



108 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

All this is clear enough. The abuses which existed among 
the higher clergy were so notorious that even the sup- 
porters of the Anglican Church had to acknowledge them. 
Sandys, Bishop of London, writes to Burghley in this 
strain (1573) : "I lament with your lordship, from the 
bottom of my heart, that such as should be feeders of the 
flock only feed themselves, and turn teaching into com- 
manding, sua quaerentes, et non quae sunt Jesu Christi. 
Such I wish to be removed, and more faithful pastors in 
their rooms placed. "^^^ The following is taken from a 
letter of Thomas Lever, a famous non-conformist divine, 
addressed to Leicester and Cecil jointly in 1565 : 

" The armie of the Israelites, polluted with the coviteous spoile 
of Achan, cold neither use sufficient power nor good polieie 
against thar and Gods ennemies, until that offence Avas confessed, 
and such corruption utterlie abolished from among Gods people. 
And then did God give unto his people the use of power and 
police,^*^ to prevaile against their ennemies. So England, being 
polluted with mich coviteous spoil, espeeialli of impropriations, 
grammar scoles, and other provision for the pore, cannot use 
power and polieie, to prevaile against the ennemies of God and 
godli religion, if it sink stil into such corruption, as eauseth 
more sclander and danger daili to incresse unto the cheife pro- 
fessors and promoters of good religion. And certenli the neces- 
sari revenues of the Prince, the Bishops, other estates, and the 
Universities, do as yet rather sinke into the corruption, then 
stand upon the profits of improperations."^^" 

The two lines which soon follow, 

" These wisards welter in welths waves, 
Pampred in pleasures deepe :" 

(11. 197-8) 

Puritans both by themselves and others points to more than a coinci- 
dence, (cf. Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, p. 303). 

^*^ Strype, Parker, II, p. 287. 

"' Policy. 

^■* Strype, Parker, III, p. 139. 



THE JULY ECLOGUE 109 

are particularly Puritan, and, when taken with E. K.'s 
comment upon the word "wisards", "greate learned 
heads", savour distinctly of Cambridge and the Puritan 
discontent with the Heads of colleges. In a complaint 
against the Provost of King's College in 1569, the follow- 
ing charges occur in articles preferred against him by the 
Puritan fellows: "that the said Provost never preached, 
neither at home nor abroad, weltering in idleness, and 
wholly serving mammon;" "that he privily took bribes in 
letting the college leases;" "that he was grown to great 
wealth by hiring others to purchase Privy Counsellors' 
letters for the college leases ".^^^ Here is what another 
Puritan has to say of the Anglican authorities in Cam- 
bridge: "while they are clothed in scarlet, their flockes 
perishe for cold; and while they fare deliciouslie, ther 
people faint with a most miserable hunger".^^- This fur- 
ther quotation illustrates in a nut-shell Spenser's thesis: 
"take away the lordship, the loitering, the pomp, the idle- 
ness, and livings of bishops, but yet employ them to such 
ends as they were in the old church appointed for".^^^ 
These are indeed the "great stores and thriftye stockes" of 
the Anglican ecclesiastics which Thomalin is denouncing. 
The fourth charge which Thomalin brings against the 
Anglican hierarchy is involved in the previous one. It 
arises from the idleness and lordly living of the bishops, 
who do not administer to the welfare of their parishioners, 
but corruptly appoint and maintain an unlearned minis- 
try. This objection crops out in the following passages: 

" The corne is theyrs, let other thresh, 
Their handes they may not file. 

»'-' Strype, Grindal, pp. 213-4. 

"- Strype, Parker, III, p. 222, a letter of Edward Dering to 
Biirghley on the new statutes at Cambridge. 

'^ Admonition to the Parliament, in Whitgift, Works, III, p. 8. 



110 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

They ban great stores and thriftye stockes, 
Great freendes and feeble foes: 
What neede hem caren for their flocks, 
Theyr boyes can looke to those. 

They han fatte kernes, and leany knaves. 
Their fasting flockes to keepe." 

(11. 191-200) 

This was another of the most flagrant abuses in the Church. 
At the request of courtiers, at the instigation of the Queen, 
who did not object to unlearned ministers (because they 
could not preach), and in return for fees or other favors, 
the bishops continually admitted into the cure of souls 
persons of no education, "bakers, butchers, cooks, and 
stablemen, wholly illiterate, drunken and licentious ".^^* 
To the Puritans, who, as far as intellectual ability and up- 
right living are concerned, were the flower of the ministry, 
such proceedings seemed abominable. In their writings 
they waxed vehement against this species of Church cor- 
ruption. The practices of Archbishop Parker, who in- 
ducted "boyes" (1. 196) into benefices provided the ade- 
quate fees were forthcoming, gave only too much sanction 
to their indignation. Listen to Cartwright : ' ' for, whereas 
in the old church a trial was had both of their ability to 
instruct, and of their godly conversation also ; now by the 
letters commendatory of some one man, noble or other, 
tag and rag, learned and unlearned, of the basest sort of 
the people (to the slander of the gospel in the mouths of 
the adversaries) are freely received ; "^^^ "then (viz. in the 
Apostolic Church) election (of ministers) was made by 
the common consent of the whole church : now every one 
picketh out for himself some notable good benefice, he 

1" Campbell, I, p. 459. 

'^ Cartwright 's Beply, in Whitgif t, Works, I, p. 296. 



THE JULY ECLOGUE 111 

obtaineth the next advowson by money or by favour, and 
so thinketh himself sufficiently chosen ;"^^*' "then the con- 
gregation had authority to call ministers: instead thereof 
now they run, they ride, and by unlawful suit and buying 
prevent other suitors also".^^' 

In this manner Thomalin closes his scathing denunciation 
of the ' ' ambitious Pastours ' ' of the present day. Morrell 's 
reply is a common enough Anglican retort: 

" When folke bene fat, and riches rancke, 
It is a signe of helth." 

(11. 211-12) 

Aylmer and his brother prelates professed to believe that 
the Puritans were seeking the spoil of their sees,^^^ and that 
the prosperity of the Church could not long remain after 
they had been deprived of their temporalities. 

The concluding section of the eclogue (11. 215-228), 
which refers to Grindal's sequestration under the allegory 
of the Eagle and the Shell-fish, has been explained many 
times. I shall content myself with quoting Herford's elu- 
cidation: "Elizabeth (the she-eagle) desiring to crush the 
Puritans (the shell-fish), sought to make Grindal, the 
newly-appointed archbishop, the instrument of the blow. 
But Grindal, not being 'chalk', declined to be used thus; 
whereupon the blow intended for the Puritans spent itself 
upon him,"^^" It should be remembered that "the blow 
intended for the Puritans" actually fell on them, for the 
"prophesyings" received a set-back throughout the realm. 
Otherwise this explanation covers the facts and is satis- 
factory. 

"« Ibid., p. 339. 
"' Ibid., p. 340. 

"' Cf. Whitgift in his Worls, I, p. 11 ; Strype, Amials, II, pt. 1, p. 
288; Parker's letters in his Correspondence, passim. 
"» Notes to the July eclogue, 11. 221 ff. 



112 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

This brings my discussion of the eclogue to a close. In 
view of the conventional acceptation of the identifications 
of Morrell and Algrind, more has hitherto been known 
about the purpose of Spenser's satire here than in the 
other "morall" eclogues. Chiefly owing to the pastoral 
motif of the debate, a relatively small portion of the 
poem is devoted to satire upon ecclesiastical abuses. The 
defence of Grindal, however, has additional importance in 
view of Spenser's biography, and will be discussed with 
some detail in a subsequent portion of this work, 

(5) The September Eclogue 

For the September eclogue Spenser has reserved his 
fiercest satire, and that no one may doubt the truth of his 
indignation he introduces his most intimate friend, Harvey, 
as an interlocutor, not indeed as the mouth-piece of his 
satire, for that might have been dangerous, but as the tacit 
supporter of the views therein expressed. Spenser's pur- 
pose is again explained by E. K. : "Herein Diggon Davie 
is devised to be a shepheard that, in hope of more gayne, 
drove his sheepe into a farre country. The abuses whereof, 
and loose living of Popish prelates, by occasion of Hob- 
binol's demand, he discourseth at large." In the gloss E. 
K. is even more reticent than in the February, May, and 
July eclogues, for he offers only two comments in explana- 
tion of the allegory.^"" In view of its vehemence he per- 
haps thought that comment would be thrown away. The 
form of this satire differs from that of the May and July 
eclogues in that the interlocutors do not take opposite 
sides; on the other hand, the fact that one speaker up- 
holds by far the greater part of the conversation draws it 
nearer to the ' ' February ' ' than to the other two. 

""The glosses to "marrie that" (1. 96) and "great hunt" (1. 159). 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 113 

Whoever Diggon Davie may be,^^^ he is evidently a 
clergyman who has once had a ' ' f ayre flocke ' ', but who has 
now lost it, and who returns to Hobbinol after an ab- 
sence of nine months. Although it is not altogether safe to 
trust to an identification of localities in the Calender 
through what we know of the persons therein represented, 
it seems reasonable to suppose that Spenser intended 
Cambridge or its vicinity as the scene of this dialogue. 
The place is stated to be Hobbinol's home (1. 254), at any 
rate, which, if interpreted strictly, would be either Cam- 
bridge or Saffron Walden. The April and June eclogues, 
in which Hobbinol also appears, offer nothing contradic- 
tory, and, although Hobbinol re-appears in Ireland in 
Colin Clout's, his presence is required on account of Spen- 
ser's residence in that country, and it is not represented 
as his home. From this point it is an easy step to imag- 
ine that Diggon Davie has returned to Cambridge or Saf- 
fron Walden after a journey to London of an unsuccess- 
ful or disagreeable nature. The "farre country" which 
E. K. mentions in the "argument" is evidently a thinly 
veiled allusion to London, for Diggon is referring to the 
head-quarters of ecclesiastical authority. In the eclogue of 
Mantuan from which Spenser has here borrowed material, 
Rome is the city designated as the source of Church cor- 
ruption, and it is clear that Spenser also had the metrop- 
olis of his own country in mind. 

The actual satire, which is aimed at both Churchmen and 
courtiers, begins at 1. 32. In this first attack (11. 32-46) 
Diggon enumerates four specific abuses, which he sub- 
sequently assails at greater length: (1) the traffic in 
Church livings and licenses (11. 36-7), (2) the system of 

'" I have elsewhere identified him with Eichard Greenham. As, 
unlike Palinode (May), he is not the object of the satire, his identi- 
fication makes little difference as far as the general nature of the 
poet's aim is concerned^ for he merely utters the latter 's views. 



114 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

fines (11. 38-40), (3) the unfair oppression of the lower 
clergy by the higher, viz. the Puritans by the Anglicans 
(11. 40-1), and (4) the pride of the ecclesiasts (11. 42-46). 
The first charge seems to include both lay and ecclesias- 
tical patrons of benefices, but the peculiar allusion, 

" They setten to sale their shops of shame," 

(1. 36) 

suggests the corruption of the Archbishop of Canterbury's 
courts.^**' The abuses pertaining to these courts were so 
notorious that Archbishop Parker in 1573, after the publi- 
cation of Cartwright's Reply, felt compelled to draw up 
a paper in defence of the loose condition of the court of 
Faculties, from which licenses and dispensations were 
issued."^ The following extract is characteristic of the 
Puritan objections to these: 

( " What should we speak of the archbishop's court, sith all men 
know it, and your wisdom cannot but see what it is. As all other 
courts are subject to this by the pope's prerogative, yea, and by 
statute of this realm yet unrepealed, so is it the filthy quavemire 
and poisoned plash of all the abominations that do infect the 
whole realm. We speak not of licenses granted out of this court 
to marry in forbidden times, as in Lent, in Advent, in the gang- 
week, when banners and bells, with the priest in his surplice 
singing gospels, and making crosses, rangeth about in many 
places, upon the ember days, and to forbidden persons, and in 
exempt places. We make no mention of licenses to eat white 
meat and flesh in Lent, and that with a safe conscience, for rich 
men that can buy them with money; nor we say nothing how 
dearly men pay for them. As for dispensations with beneficed 
boys, tolerations for non-residents, bulls to have two benefices, 

^^ Of these there were four, vis. the courts of Faculties, Arches, 
Audience, and Prerogative. For Cartwright's view of their corrup- 
tions, cf. Whitgift, Worlcs, III, pp. 265 ff. 

^"^ Strype, Parlcer, II, pp. 258-64. 



I 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 115 

to have three, to have more, and as many as they list or can get; 
these are so common that all godly and good men are compelled 
with grief of heart to ei-y out upon such abominations. ... To 
conclude, this filthy court hath full power, together with the 
authority of this petty pope, metropolitan and primate of all j 

England, to dispense in all causes wherein the pope was wont 
to dispense; under which are contained more eases and causes 
than we are able to reckon."^®* 

Ecclesiastical abuses such as these were so notorious that 
a mere hint from Spenser would have been enough to show 
that he had them in mind. 

The next two sources of corruption which Diggon Davie 
assails are closely related to each other. When his lan- 
guage has been translated, they are undoubtedly the system 
of taking unjust fines^*^^ and the general oppression of the 
lower clergy by the bishops : 

" The shepheards there robben one another, 
And layen baytes to beguile her brother; 
Or they will buy his sheepe out of the cote. 
Or they will carven the shepheards throte." 

(11, 38-41) 

The Queen was accustomed to demand peremptorily the 
appointment of her nominees to lucrative benefices, and 2-- 

the bishops were therefore constantly compelled either to 
eject incumbents or to transfer them from a rich living to 
a poorer one. This seems to be what the poet intends when 
he speaks of buying "his sheepe out of the cote", with the 
alternative of a figurative throat-cutting resulting in ruin- 
ation. The abuses of the fines system were so deep-rooted 
that they remained a source of evil throughout Elizabeth's 
reign in spite of reformatory legislation. 

i«* Cartwright 's Beply, in Whitgift, Worlcs, III, pp. 276-7. 
^*' MuUinger, I, pp. 376 ff., gives a good account of the abuses of 
the system of fines. 



116 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

The last malpractice to which Diggon refers is the pride 
and arrogance of the clergy: 

" The shepheardes swayne you cannot well ken, 
But it be by his pryde, from other men :" 

(11. 42-3) 

It is the same objection which Piers and Thomalin have 

already urged against the lordship and pomp of ambitious 

prelates. From a report drawn up in ISBS^^** against the 

Dean and Chapter of Worcester, quoted by Froude,^^'^ we 

/ read: " 'They (the Church dignitaries) decked their wives 

so finely for the stuff and fashion of their garments as none 

J were so fine and trim. ' By her dress and ' her gait ' in the 

I street 'the priest's wife was known from a hundred other 

women'; while in the congregations and in the cathedrals 

they were distinguished 'by placing themselves above all 

others the most ancient and honorable in their cities'," 

After some remarks on his miserable condition, Diggon 
Davie again takes up the burden of his attack on the cor- 
rupt clergy (1. 80). In this speech (11. 80-101), which 
liobbinol considers "dirke", Diggon continues to assail 
the more prominent abuses in the Church government. 
The pastors whom he has seen in London are either "ydle" 
(11. 80-1), or "false and full of covetise" (11. 82-3), or 
else spightful and contentious (11. 84-9). The maintenance 
of an idle and corrupt ministry by the bishops was, of 
course, one of the standing grievances of the Puritans. It 
seemed to them absurd and cruel that unlearned men, even 
Papists, should be kept in place because they subscribed 
the articles, when learned and godly men were deprived of 
their livings owing to their advocation of a return to purer 

^^ Lemon, p. 223. 

^^ Froude, VII, pp. 476-7. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 117 

methods of Church government.^"^ Even Burghley and 
the bishops themselves acknowledged that many unlearned 
and corrupt men got into the Church. While Diggon's 
first two categories are therefore easy to explain, it might 
appear at first sight that his third division was aimed at 
the contentious Puritans. Even though Spenser may not 
have altogether sympathized with some of the dogmatic 
tendencies of Puritanism, it would be inconsistent of him 
to classify these Reformers with the corrupt and ignorant 
place-holders. The peculiar use of the word "holy water" 
(1. 89), however, precludes such an interpretation. The 
Catholic rite of sprinkling "holy water" was not retained 
in the Anglican Church, and it is therefore possible that 
Spenser was striking at the recusant Papists who were 
trying to subvert the Church, More probably, however, he 
referred by familiar Puritan methods to the Popish char- 
acter of the Anglican clergy, who ' ' kindle coales of conteck 
and yre" by enforcing the ecclesiastical statutes,^*"* and 
then attempt to evade responsibility for their proceedings 
by a reference to a higher authority. The word Jioly 
water was frequently applied to anything used to deceive 
people. In a letter written by Sir Francis Englefield at 
this time we read: "Arundel has sat in the Council since 
Pembroke's death, and methinks will have the staff^^" 
again, for much holy water of Court is sprinkled on him, 
and small things suffice to blear the eyes of them that be 
purblind already. "^^^ 

les i I jjg spake at large of the abuses of the Church of England ; at 
first, that known Papists are admitted to have Ecclesiastical Govern- 
ment, and great livings; that godly, honest and learned Protestants 
have little or nothing" (Extract from the speech of Mr. Strickland, a 
Puritan, in the Parliament of 1571, cf. D'Ewes, p. 157). 

"' Cartwright attacked the Anglicans for fomenting ' ' contention ' ' 
{cf. Second Beply, p. 227). 

"° The office of Lord Chamberlain is meant. 

^" Green, Cal. State Papers, p. 279. 



118 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

The rest of this speech of Diggon's (11. 90-101) is merely 
a general attack on this ignorant and corrupt clergy, whose 
souls are "paund" to the Devil and "which by popish 
Exorcismes and practices they damne to hell" (E. K.). 
Without hinting at any particular abuses, he prepares the 
reader for the severe arraignment which occurs in his next 
speech (11. 104-35). Here Diggon's satire is aimed not 
only at the corruption of the bishops, but at the rapacity 
of the courtiers who preyed upon the lands of the Church. 
At the beginning he speaks out clearly : 

" Then, playnely to speake of shepheards most what, 
Badde is the best;" 

(11. 104-5) 

Nothing can be plainer than this ; all attempts on the part 
either of Spenser or E. K, to disguise the true intent of the 
satire by pretending that it is meant for the Catholics is 
here dropped. To leave a loop-hole for a convenient disa- 
vowal, Diggon is not made to advance these charges on 
his own responsibility; he recites merely what he has 
heard. His authorities he divides into four classes of 
critics,^^- in whose mouths he places remarks prevalent in 
regard to Church corruption. All, however, are agreed in 
censuring the doctrine and the faith of the clergy, whose 
lives accord so ill with what they profess (11. 106-7). The 
first set attack the ignorance of the ministry .- 

" They sayne the world is much war then it wont, 
All for her shepheards bene beastly and blont." 

(11. 108-9) 

This is merely a repetition of what Spenser has stated 
before,^'^^ and voices an objection which was only too 

"-Herford comments upon this division. 
'"May eclogue, 11. 39-44. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 119 

notorious in his day, as we have already seen.^'^* It was 
Archbishop Grindal's attempt to reform this glaring de- 
ficiency by the institution of the " prophesy ings" which 
cost him his place. The distinctive Puritanism of Spenser's 
remark lies chiefly in the fact that he had advanced it 
openly. Bishop Cox, writing to Burghley in vindication of 
Grindal, says : ' ' and when the great ignorance, idleness, 
and lewdness of the great number of poor and blind priests 
in the clergy, shall be deeply weighed and considered of, 
it will be thought most necessary to call them, and to drive 
them, to some travel and exercise of God's holy word: 
whereby they may be the better able to discharge their 
bounden duty towards their flock".^'^^ The ignorance of 
the clergy had become a bye-word of reproach. 

The second set of critics maintain the following ob- 
jection : 

" Other sayne, but how truely I note, 
All for they holden shame of theyr cote : " 

(11. 110-1) 

This means, of course, that the pastors are ashamed of their 
flocks, not on account of their profession, but probably 
because of the wretchedness of their livings.^^*' At a time 
when less than one third of the benefices were served in the 
diocese of Ely, in which he had resided for seven years, it 
may well have seemed to Spenser that the "shepheards" 
really were ashamed of "theyr cote".^''^ Cartwright spe- 
cifically alluded to this condition: "I know myself that 
within seven miles of Cambridge there have bene parishes 

"* Cf. especially the Answer to a Servian by Bishop Cooper, in 
Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 287 ff. 

"» Ibid., pt. 2, p. 611. 

"*Herford says that this is "their scorn for the laity". Such an 
interpretation is so broad that it is well nigh meaningless. 

*" Strype, Parker, I, p. 144. 



120 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

where one of these sermons was not in four whole years. 
Which if yt be so neere Cambridge, where the greatest 
numbers of those preachers be, what is it to be thought of 
other places of the Realme."^'^ 

With the objection of the third set of critics, however, 
Spenser begins to attack those who are more nearly respon- 
sible for the wretched condition of the Church. Here he 
is once more assailing the corruption of the Church digni- 
taries who alienate their sees and hoard up money for their 
families. It is the same argument which Piers has lodged 
in the ''May" (11.77-94): 

" Some sticke not to say, (whote cole on her tongue !)^^^ 
That sike mischiefs graseth hem among, 
All for they casten too much of worlds care, 
To deck her^^*' Dame, and enrich her heyre; 
For such encheason, if you goe nye, 
Fewe chymneis reeking you shall espye; 
The fatte Oxe, that wont ligge in the stal, 
Is nowe fast stalled in her en;menall.""* 

(U. 111-19) 

For the ministers' decking of their ''dames" I have only to 
refer to the extracts made from Froude a few pages back, 
and for their aggrandizing of riches for their children I 
would merely have to repeat what I have said in my remarks 
on the May eclogue. The doings of Archbishop Parker, 
who loaded his children with rich grants and leases, fur- 
nished the most prominent example of this abuse. In 
addition to four benefices which his father granted him a 
dispensation to hold, John Parker was possessed of six 
estates or manor-houses, one of which he purchased from 

'" Second Eeply, p. 364. 

"° This is a case in question where Diggon seeks to avoid responsi- 
bility for his utterances. 
»" Their. 
^" Purse. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 121 

the Marquis of Winchester for £1992! But this was not 
all; at least six other lucrative grants of offices or leases 
he also received at his father's hands, and how much more 
he was given it is impossible to say.^^- These abuses, con- 
sidered in regard to the welfare of the Church, are well 
summarized as follows : ' ' the Churchmen heaped up many 
benefices upon themselves, and resided upon none, neglect- 
ing their cures; many of them alienated their lands, made 
unreasonable leases and wastes of their woods, granted re- 
versions and advowsons to their wives and children, or to 
others for their use".^^^ To this alienation of Church 
property Spenser refers in the last two lines of the passage 
quoted above under the figure of the "fatte Oxe" which 
has been sold, the proceeds thereof being transferred to the 
purse of the clergyman. Incidentally, this description 
seems also to hint at the decrease of liberality among the 
clergy. Their chimneys no longer smoke, for they do not 
keep up the ancient hospitality. Negligence in this respect 
Elizabeth was never tired of imputing to her bishops, and 
it was the cause of considerable legislation in Parliament. 
Under an "Act concerning good hospitality among the 
clergy" in the Parliament of 1575 we read: "ample reve- 
nues were granted the clergy that they might show hospi- 
tality, but many, being now married, neglect it, keep fewer 
servants, and reserve their incomes for their children ".^^* 
The lack of liberality was indeed the result of the clergy's 
alienation of their property in favor of themselves and 
their families, and it was Elizabeth's profound dislike of 
their marriages, as much as her willingness to have every- 
one except herself spend money for the honor of the realm, 
which drew down her constant censure upon the bishops 

"^Strype, TarTcer, especially I, pp. 467-70. 

^"^lUd., p. 204. 

"'Quoted by Froude, X, p. 195. 



122 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

for their niggardliness. But, although she and her advisers 
could condemn these corrupt practices, anyone else who 
raised his voice was considered a Puritan "precisian". 

To give emphasis to the objection of the fourth set of 
critics Spenser not only reserves it for the last place, but 
treats it at greater length than the others. This piece of 
satire (11. 122-135) is a vehement attack on the rapacity of 
the courtiers who traffic in Church property, and its posi- 
tion after the others is especially noticeable, because it pre- 
pares the way for the fable of Roffy and Lowder. The 
opening lines are expressive : 

" But they that shooten neerest the pricke 
Sayne, other the fat from their beards doen lick ; " 

(11. 122-3) 

This kind of language Spenser probably heard every day 
in Cambridge. In the midst of the Cartwright-Whitgift 
controversy charges — "libels" according to the Anglicans 
— "were publicly scattered in the schools, viz. that poor 
men toil and travel, but the prince and the doctors, they 
licked up all".^^^ Spenser echoes the spirit of these, and 
it is evident that he is quoting from the stock vocabulary 
of the Puritans. This passage presents a concrete illustra- 
tion of the influences which the disputes at Cambridge ex- 
erted on Spenser's ecclesiastical satire. The poet continues 
in the same vein : 

" For bigge Bulles of Basan brace hem about, 
That with theyr homes butten the more stoute; 
But the leane soules treaden under foote," 

(11. 124-6) 

Although I have not run across the use of the term ' ' Bulles 
of Basan" by the Puritans to denote courtiers and lay 
patrons of benefices, this is clearly the meaning here in- 
"* Strype, Annals, 1, pt. 2, p. 374. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 123 

tended. These corrupt patrons mulcted the benefices before 
they bestowed them upon the highest bidder; in the case 
of those ministers who are "more stoute", who are blessed 
with some means, this process injures but does not ruin 
them; in the case of the "leane soules", however, who are 
poor and needy, this subsidy system makes them practically 
bankrupt. This is an allegorical and earlier version of the 
outspoken satire of the Mother Huhberd's Tale (11. 302- 
44), and perhaps, as Herford intimates in his notes to the 
September eclogue, Spenser may have had Burghley in 
mind as one of the "Bulles". Certain it is that Archbishop 
Parker on his death-bed charged that statesman and his 
brother-in-law. Sir Nicolas Bacon, with procuring the 
spoil of the Church,^^" and no one could have been better 
informed on that matter except Burghley himself. Of the 
latter 's views on the subject of presentations Spenser could 
scarcely have been ignorant, for it was by his advice that 
Elizabeth refused to sign the bill for repressing "the buy- 
ing and selling of fellowships, scholarships, and all offices 
of emolument in the two universities", a measure passed 
by the Parliament of 1576-7.^^^ 

Diggon's satire continues as follows: 

" And to seeke redresse mought little boote ; 
For liker bene they to pluck away more, 
Then ought of the gotten good to restore: 
For they bene like foule wagmoires overgrast, 
That, if thy galage once sticketh fast, 
The more to wind it out thou doest swinck. 
Thou mought ay deeper and deeper sinck. 
Yet better leave of with a little losse. 
Then by much wrestling to leese the grosse." 

(11. 127-35) 

'*« Strype, TarTier, II, p. 431. 
1" Mullinger, I, pp. 268-9. 



124 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

The purpose of the Puritans was to discredit the Anglican 
clergy and their methods of Church administration. They 
were less interested in the abuse of corrupt presentations 
by lay patrons, except in so far as these contributed to the 
maintenance of an idle and ignorant ministry. Even then, 
however, they were apt to lay the blame on the bishops who 
connived at these doings, and consequently only a few 
attacks may be found from the Puritan controversialists 
of Spenser's day on the corrupt practices of the courtier- 
patrons. The Puritan point of view on this subject may 
be gathered from the Admonition to the Parliament: "The 
way therefore to avoid these inconveniences^^* ... is 
this: your wisdoms have to remove advowsons, patron- 
ages, impropriations, and bishops' authority, claiming to 
themselves thereby right to ordain ministers, and to bring 
in that old and true election which was accustomed to be 
made by the congregation. . . . Take away the lordship, 
the loitering, the pomp, the idleness, and livings of 
bishops. "^^^ Now from this the point of view of Spenser 
differs. He sympathizes with the clergy whose benefices are 
mulcted by greedy patrons, and he therefore takes the side 
of those Churchmen who protested against this abuse. 
Archbishop Parker writes of the condition of the diocese 
of Norwich in 1568: "Whereof I heard, of credible and of 
worshipful persons, that Gehazi and Judas had a wonder- 
ful haunt in the country, that Quid vidtis miJii dare? had 
so much prevailed there among the Simonians,^'**' that novv^ 
to sell and to buy benefices, to fleece parsonages and vicar- 
ages, that omnia erant venalia. And I was informed the 
best of the country, not under the degree of knights, were 
infected with this sore, so that some one knight had four or 

18S ( I (jjjg abuses yet remaining in the ministry, ' * 

^«» In Whitgif t, Works, III, p. 8. 

^"Persons guilty of simony. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 125 

five, some other seven or eight benefices clouted together, 
fleecing them all, defrauding the crown's subjects of their 
duty of prayers, somewhere setting boys and their serving 
men to bear the names of such livings. "^^^ Spenser would 
probably have agreed with his friend. Archbishop Grindal, 
who wrote that "it is found now, that this Church of Eng- 
land hath been by 'appropriations', and that not without 
sacrilege, spoiled of the livings. . . . Which 'appropria- 
tions' were first annexed to abbies; . . . and now are dis- 
persed to private men's possessions, without hope to reduce 
the same to the original institution. So as at this day, in 
mine opinion, where one Church is able to yield sufiicient 
living for a learned preacher, there are at least seven 
churches unable to do the same ;^'*- and in many parishes of 
your realm, where there be seven or eight hundred souls, 
. . . there are not eight pounds a year reserved for a Min- 
ister. "^^^ In this satire on the corrupt practices of the 
courtiers who trafficked in Church livings Spenser is voic- 
ing a grievance of which the regular clergy complained 
even more than the Puritans. 

Upon the conclusion of Diggon's speech, Hobbinol asks 
him of the condition of the flocks which are kept by these 
idle and corrupt pastors. In an answer which resembles 
the Biblical language of St. John (chap. 10), Diggon 
refers to the wretched moral condition of the people : 

" They wander at wil and stay at pleasure, 
And to theyr foldes yeed at their owne leasure," 

(11. 143-5) 

The Irreverence and blasphemy of the people, especially 
marked in parishes whose ministers were ignorant or dis- 

"^ Parker, Correspondence, p. 311. 
**- This is the view which Cartwright held. 

"'Grindal to the Queen, Dec. 20 (8), 1576, quoted by Strype, 
Grindal, p. 565. 



126 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

solute, had become proverbial. Grindal, in the injunctions 
which he drew up for a visitation in 1571, directs the atten- 
tion of his clergy to the reformation of morality among the 
laity: "Ye shall openly every Sunday . . . warn the 
churchwardens and sworn-men of your parish to look to 
their oaths . . . and to observe who, contrary to the law, 
do that day offend either in absenting themselves negli- 
gently or wilfully from their parish church ... or unrev- 
erently use themselves in the time of divine service ; " " that 
the churchwardens, etc. shall not suffer any person to walk, 
talk, or otherwise unreverently to behave themselves in any 
church or chapel, nor to use any gaming, or to sit abroad 
in the streets or church-yards, or in any tavern or alehouse 
upon the Sundays or other holy days, in the time of divine 
service;" "that the minister and churchwardens shall not 
suffer any lords of misrule, or summer lords or ladies, or 
any disguised persons or others in Christmas or at May 
games,^^* or any minstrels, morrice-dancers, etc. to come un- 
reverently into any church or church-yard, and there dance 
or play any unseemly parts with scoffs, jests, wanton gestures, 
or ribald talk, namely in the time of divine service ".^^^ 
These he subsequently repeated in 1576, after his trans- 
ference to Canterbury. The very fact that he has noticed 
these customs attests the irreverence and ignorance of the 
common people. 

Diggon's succeeding reference to "ravenous Wolves" (1. 
148) is directed at corrupt ministers, probably with especial 
reference to those who are really Catholic at heart. In the 
controversial language of the time the word wolf was used 
by each religious party to denote its adversaries. The 
Anglicans applied the term to the Papists, and the Papists 
to the Anglicans, while the Puritans used it of both. Cart- 

^^ Cf. Stubbes, Anatomie of Abuses, pp. 141-5 (reprint by Collier). 
"" Grindal, Eemains, pp. 129, 139, 141-2. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 127 

Wright, speaking of the idle ' ' reading ministers ' ' instituted 
by the bishops, remarks : ' ' the sheep are not only committed 
to an idle shepherd, I might say a wolf", etc. In fact any 
minister who did not regard the welfare of his flock was 
considered a wolf}^^ Diggon, therefore, is referring in gen- 
eral to corrupt ministers infected with Papistical opinions, 
who are distinguished by Hobbinol from ''Foxes" in his 
attempt to bring the reader back to the realm of pastoral 
poetry : 

"But the fewer Woolves (the soth to sayne) 
The more bene the Foxes that here remaine." 

(11. 154-5) 

The term fox was also used to designate both Catholics and 
Anglicans. "William Turner, a celebrated Puritan, Dean of 
Wells under Edward and Elizabeth, wrote a book entitled 
The Huntyng and Fynding out of the Romish Fox}^'^ 
Another work he called The Huntyng of the Romishe 
Wolfe, and still another. The Huntyng of the Fox and 
Wolfe, because they did make havoc of the Sheep of Jesus 
Christ. Here the terms wolves and foxes are both applied 
to the Catholics. The latter seems to have been generally 
used in a broad sense for enemies of the Church,^^^ and the 
Puritans therefore fastened it upon the Anglicans. Bishop 
Cooper's unknown opponent stigmatizes the Anglican hier- 
archy as "crafty michers" and "subtile foxes". If 
Spenser, therefore, meant to make a difference between 
the wolves and the foxes, he probably intended the Catho- 

^^ Strype, ParJcer, II, p. 335. 

^'" The Hunting of the Hare with curres and bandogs is the title of 
a Catholic reply to this (Camden Society, 77, 1st s., p. 61). 

"* Sandys, Sermons, etc. (Parker Society), pp. 62 ff. The use of 
this term eventually harks back to the Song of Solomon, II, 15: "take 
us the foxes, the little foxes that destroy our vines; for our vines have 
small grapes". 



128 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

lies by the former and the Anglicans by the latter.^^^ Dig- 
gon's further remark upon the wolves, 

" They walke not widely as they were wont, 
For feare of raungers and the great hunt," 

(11. 158-9) 

coupled with the explanation of E. K. that "the great 
hunt" means the "execution of lawes and iustice", bears 
out this interpretation, for after the massacre of St. Bar- 
tholomew's day-°° (1572) the laws against the Catholics 
were more strictly enforced for a short time. A reference 
at this point to the Papists, moreover, would provide the 
poet with a loop-hole of escape in case that he were prose- 
cuted for libel in the tale of Roffy. 

"With this, we are brought face to face with the fable of 
Roffy, Lowder, and the Wolf, of which no satisfactory ex- 
planation has ever been offered in print. In the gloss E. K. 
remarks: "This tale of Roffy seemeth to coloure some par- 
ticular Action of his. But what, I certainly know not." 
This statement, coming as it does immediately after the 
acknowledgment that the poet "by the name of other shep- 
heardes, covereth the persons of divers other his familiar 
freendes and best acquayntaunce ", has seemed to Spenser's 
editors to indicate clearly that he is dealing with a matter 
of no small interest. Herf ord remarked that ' ' Roffynn and 
Lowder were, however, doubtless actual persons", while 
Grosart has offered the one explanation of their identity 
set forth in print.^'*^ Briefly speaking, he identifies Roffy, 
or Roffynn, as the name once occurs (1, 171), with Dr. John 
Young, Master of Pembroke during Spenser's entire col- 
legiate residence and nominated Bishop of Rochester on 

"' Cf. Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, p. S, where Gilby calls the Papists 
wolves and the Anglican bishops foxes. 

^""E. K. refers to tfiis in the "May" gloss to 1. 302. 
^o' Spenser, WorTcs, I, pp. 62-4. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 129 

January 31, 1577-8, a dignity in which he was finally in- 
stalled on the following first day of April. The ground of 
identification is the practical coincidence of Roffynn with 
Boffen, the abridged form of the Bishop of Rochester 's offi- 
cial name. Lowder, Grosart thinks, is intended to repre- 
sent Young's chancellor, Lloyd, owing to the similarity in 
sound between the two names. So far, his means of identi- 
fication are good, but when he declares that Lloyd "had 
made himself obnoxious to his bishop by taking sides with 
the 'wolves', envious people at court who complained of 
Young's niggardly hospitality ",-°- he destroys the whole 
force of his theory. Lowder helps Roffy kill the Wolf in 
Spenser's fable, and certainly acts throughout as his co- 
operator, . Grosart must have seen this obvious absurdity, 
for he has carefully avoided any attempt to reconcile his 
hypothesis with the actual contents of the "tale". Even 
if this difficulty could be overcome, it is extremely unlikely 
that Spenser was thinking of Young, in spite of the coinci- 
dence of names. The laborious researches of the inde- 
fatigable Strype, the thorough-going supporter of the 
Anglican bishops, have unearthed notliing but the barest 
information concerning Young. Beyond noting the facts 
that he succeeded Whitgift as Master of Pembroke Hall, 
and that he preached four sermons at various times, 
Strype has no information to give about him previous to 
his appointment as bishop. Even on that occasion, when 
he attempted to collect all the available facts of his life, he 
could present no fresh material except that he "wrote notes 
upon H. N. 's-**^ book, called Evangelium Regni", and that 
Aylmer warmly recommended him in 1581 for the see of 

^- Grosart 's information is singularly inaccurate. There is not a 
shred of evidence to show that Young got into trouble with the cour- 
tiers until 1595. 

^ Henry Nicholas, founder of the sect of the Family of Love. 
10 



130 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Norwich,'^* "who for his quickness in government, and his 
readiness in learning, is the fittest man for that country 
that I know".^"^ Although the latter fact — that he was a 
friend of Aylmer — would probably have been enough to 
condemn him in Spenser's eyes, this is not the main point. 
From the meagre details which Strype was able to scrape 
together, less than in the case of almost any bishop of the 
time, the fact remains that Young was a painfully unim- 
portant man. So far from his being a "Puritan-bishop", 
as Grosart asserts, he subscribed the Roman Catholic 
articles in 1555, attempted to frustrate the search for 
"Popish" books in 1568 at Cambridge,-"'' and was evidently 
considered a thorough-going Anglican, as Aylmer testi- 
fied.-"^ Spenser was not interested in persons of Young's 
calibre, who forsook their principles and who led colorless 
existences. Young was too small a man to have been the 
subject of his glowing tribute in the tale of Roffy. With 
Grosart 's concluding remark, however, that "the reference 
(in the tale) is too realistic not to have had a basis of fact," 
I can heartily agree. 

After a careful reading of the fable of Roffy, weighing it 
in the light of Spenser's known interest in important per- 
sonages and of E. K. 's pretence of ignorance of its pur- 
port, the impression remains that Spenser was dealing with 
an important contemporaneous transaction with which his 
readers must have been familiar. It seems clear that this 
fable refers to an act of depredation on Church property 
by a courtier or politician. Diggon's fierce satire on the 
"bigge BuUes of Basan" naturally calls for a story with 

="* Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, p. 184. 

^"^ Strype, Aylmer, p. 59. 

-'"' MuUinger, I, pp. 202-3 ; Cooper, Annals, II, pp. 235-8. 

^' The see of Eochester, whose possessor had to fulfill the duties of 
a Court bishop, was always occupied during Elizabeth's reign by 
Anglo-CathoIic High Churchmen. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 131 

some such intention, just as the ''May" discussion between 
Puritan and Anglican calls for an arraignment of the gov- 
ernment's Church policy. Although the fable is divided 
into two parts (11. 180-207 and 11. 212-25), the subject in 
each, the depredations of a wolf disguised as a sheep upon 
a shepherd's flock, remains the same. By wolves, as we 
have seen, Spenser intended the enemies of the Church, that 
is, either Catholics, corrupt ministers, or avaricious laymen, 
and, owing to the previous tenor of Diggon's invective, it 
seems certain that in the tale he is laying weight on this 
last meaning. The shepherd Roffy, moreover, whose name 
is introduced as some one perfectly well known to Harvey 
(1. 171), is evidently a man residing in the neighborhood of 
Cambridge, some important person in that part of the coun- 
try, in whose doings Harvey would have been greatly 
interested. Now, about the time that Spenser's academic 
career was drawing to a close, a couple of flagrant acts of 
Church robbery were in progress of transaction, both of 
which were directed at the same person, who resided in the 
county of Cambridge. 

The explanation of the tale of Roffy which I now ad- 
vance is one which may have occurred to other students of 
Spenser, but which must have been in every case laid aside 
for lack of a connecting-link. Dr. Richard Cox, the aged 
Bishop of Ely, was the object of two of the most shameful 
attempts at Church spoliation in the whole reign of Eliza- 
beth, one on the part of Sir Christopher Hatton, the other 
on the part of Roger, Lord North, each countenanced by 
the Queen. Both of these were in progress during the last 
year of Spenser's residence at Cambridge, and, as they 
have been often poorly described, or confounded with each 
other, once by no less an authority than the historian 
Froude,^*'^ it may be well to state briefly the principal 

="' History, XI, pp. 21-3, note. 



132 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

events of each. In the year 1574 Elizabeth, who disliked 
the Bishop of Ely for various reasons,-"'* and who had given 
ear to reports industriously circulated by his enemies at 
Court that he was rich, covetous, niggardly, and a spoiler 
of his see, ordered him to grant a lease of Ely-palace in 
Holborn to her favorite, Hatton.-^" The bishop, who "had 
had some experience what inconvenience had fallen by 
lending of an house ",-^^ was obliged to yield a lease of his 
palace to Hatton for twenty-one years at a nominal rent. 
The following year Hatton sought a lease of the house in 
perpetuity, to which the bishop strenuously objected to the 
Queen in an elegant Latin letter.-^- Hatton, it seems, had 
bought up an old lease of Ely-palace which had been made 
by Cox's predecessor in the see, Goodrich, and under color 
of this he instituted a suit against the bishop, for which he 
obtained Elizabeth's special permission to cause to be heard 
in the court of Chancery.-^^ This case, however, had never 
been settled owing to the demise of the Lord Keeper, Bacon, 
who died February 20, 1578/9. The upshot of the whole 
matter was that Cox was forced to convey a mortgage of 
Ely-house to the Queen, who in turn conveyed it to Hatton. 
The amount of this mortgage was £1800, the sum which 
Hatton said that he had expended upon the place.-^* In 
this manner the venerable bishop was literally robbed of 
one of the most valuable possessions of his see. 

The other attempted fleecing of Cox's bishopric was even 
more shameful. Roger, second Lord North, dwelt at his 
family seat of Kirtling, situated at about five miles ' distance 

^* The chief of these seem to have been that he advised her to marry 
and that he himself married a second time at the age of sixty-eight. 
^" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 501-2; Nicolas, Life of Hatton, p. 36. 
=" Letter to Burghley, Feb. 3, 1574-.5 (Strype). 
^^= Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 533-4. 
=•2 Ibid., pt. 2, p. 259. 
^*Bentham, Antiquities of Ely, I, p. 206, note. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 133 

from Newmarket in a south-easterly direction,^^^ and was 
prominent in the affairs of the county, succeeding the Duke 
of Norfolk as High-Steward of the tow^n of Cambridge in 
June, 1572. In May, 1575, he obtained letters from Eliza- 
beth directing Cox to alienate the manor and lands of 
Somersham,-^*^ while a few months later he bought up an 
old lease of Downham-park, another of the chief possessions 
of the see, and attempted to enter upon this property 
forcibly. These letters, which Cox received on the 18th of 
June, he answered, humbly refusing to assent to this aliena- 
tion, which was urged while Hatton's suit was in prog- 
ress.^^" North, it appears, had spread allegations against the 
bishop, charging him with all sorts of corruption in the 
administration of his see, and Cox was therefore obliged to 
apply to friends at Court in order to defend his case. In 
a letter dated November 20, 1575,-2^^ North wrote to Cox, 
bitterly upbraiding him with "stubbornness", with lack of 
hospitality, with covetousness, with spoliation of his see, 
and with other corrupt practices, and to this Cox returned 
a reply containing answers to each allegation. -^^ The 
trouble remained at its height during the months of No- 
vember, December, and January. In November Cox re- 
moved to Downham, in order to keep North from seizing 
it, and from there he wrote to Burghley asking for his 
support, which the later does not seem to have vouchsafed 
freely. In December North drew up a longer list of charges, 
and also preferred to the Council complaints of sundry 

°° Newmarket is about thirteen miles from Cambridge, and Kirtliug 
is about fourteen due east of Cambridge, as the crow flies. 

^^ About thirteen miles north-west of Cambridge, lying just across 
the border in Huntingdonshire. 

2" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 567-9. 

"" Cal. Hatfield MSS., ii, pp. 120-2. Froude misdates this a whole 
year, and confuses it with the Hatton controversy. 

"® Lemon, p. 507. 



134 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

other persons who had transacted business with Cox.^-" 
Under date of December 11 there are two letters of Cox 
among the State Papers, one petitioning the Council not to 
allow North to prefer these charges, and the other contain- 
ing specific answers to them. Although Burghley professed 
to be helping him,--^ the slanders against the bishop still 
continued, which were fomented by North 's interception of 
a letter of Cox to a friend at Court in which North made 
out that Cox "had called her majesty an harpy and plun- 
derer of the church".^-- Upon this the bishop was obliged 
to repair to London and make his submission to the Queen, 
which she was pleased to accept probably on account of the 
great notoriety attracted by this scandal of fleecing a 
patriarch of the Church who had faithfully served her 
father and brother. Although for the time the storm blew 
over, the bishop became engaged in a suit with North over 
the manor of Downham, owing to the old lease which the 
latter had bought up.--^ This matter lingered on, but the 
"hawking after his manors" by North and Hatton caused 
Cox so much trouble that he was fain to resign his see, a 
proceeding which was forestalled by his death, July 22, 
1581. Though North's proceedings were "vindictive and 
vexatious to the last degree",-^* they appear to have been 
unsuccessful, for no record remains of the alienations of 
either Somersham or Downham manors. 

Such are the two most flagrant cases of the spoliation of 
the Church in the whole reign of Elizabeth; others were 
perhaps equally bad, none so notorious. It is my belief 
that Spenser, who must have heard constant talk of these 

"" The whole list is long and may be found in toto in Strype, 
Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 270-95. 
"' Ibid., pt. 1, pp. 542 ff. 
''-Ubid., p. 544. 
"^ Ibid., pp. 548-9. 
-^Cooper, Athenae, 1, p. 441. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 135 

proceedings during the last year of his collegiate course, 
was defending the Bishop of Ely in the person of Roffy. 
That the Wolf is meant to represent Lord North and not 
Hatton, I also fully believe for the following reasons : ( 1 ) 
North's quarrel was concerned with lands in the neighbor- 
hood of Cambridge, Hatton 's with a piece of property in 
London; (2) North lived near Cambridge and, for reasons 
which I shall give, was unpopular with the University, 
whereas Hatton had no connection at all with the Univer- 
sity or the town of Cambridge; (3) North, unlike Hatton, 
failed to secure the coveted Church property, and therefore 
the description of the Wolf, whom Roffy finally overcomes, 
fits his case to the exclusion of Hatton 's, for the latter got 
what he wanted.-^^ 

The name Roffy, is borrowed, not from Marot's Eglogue 
au Boy, as E. K. remarks, but from his elegy De Mme. 
Loyse (1. 42), where it is applied to a friend of the 
author.--*' Spenser, as Grosart has noticed, once spells the 
name Roffynn (1. 171), but this seems to be as much due to 
the next word which begins with an "n" as it is to Spenser's 
variability in the spelling of proper names. At any rate, 
the word Roffy bears a near enough resemblance to R. Cox, 
judging by the poet's methods previously noted, to make us 
understand why he adopted it. He chose that pastoral 
name in the works of his more immediate masters-" which 
bore the nearest resemblance to the name of the person 
whom he wished to represent, and which also sanctioned, 

"' This last reason, it seems to me, would be conclusive even without 
the others. 

^*In the French the name appears as Eaffy, the original of whom 
was Pierre Eoffet, the publisher of Lyons who brought out some of 
Marot's poems. Prof. Henry Morley, as well as Spenser and E. K., 
has rendered the name in English as Eoffy (Clement Marot, I, p. 259). 

-" Such as the poets whom E. K. mentions in the Epistle, ' ' whose 
foting this Author everywhere followeth. " 



136 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

by its original application, the allusion to a friend. This, 
however, is not my reason for the connection of the fable 
with the Bishop of Ely on the score of names. The name of 
Roffy's dog, Lowder, which Grosart claims "was then, as 
to-day, a common name for a shepherd's dog,"^^^ is en- 
countered neither in Chaucer, Langland, Lydgate, Skel- 
ton, Barclay, Googe, The Mirror for Magistrates, or Tot- 
tel's Miscellany, in fact in none of the English poetry with 
which Spenser was probably most familiar, and there- 
fore, although it may have been a common enough name 
for a dog, it does not appear that it enjoyed a literary 
usage before Spenser.--^ As everyone knows, Spenser bor- 
rows little from rustic naturalism,^**** and it is therefore 
probable that if he really did adopt this name from the 
life, he did so only because it bore a resemblance to the 
name of the person whom he wished to represent. Now 
Bishop Cox had a brother-in-law whom he had appointed 
to the auditorship of his bishopric, and who was mixed up 
in the controversy with North and was specifically named 
by the latter in his allegations.-^^ The name of this man 
was Auder or Awder, the son of George Auder or Awder, 
once alderman of Cambridge,-^- and his sister Jane, the 

=^ Spenser, Worlcs, I, p. 63. 

^'^ According to Murray {N. E. D.) lowder is a Scottish and Northern 
word, which means (1) the stand or foundation on which a mill rests, 
(2) the wooden lever or hand-spoke for lifting the millstone, and (3) 
any long, stout, rough stick. Wright (E. D. B.) gives a few other 
dialectal significations. The word was also used (e.An.^ e.Suf.) as 
meaning to call out loudly or angrily (Eng. Dial. Soc, XXIII, p. 71). 
This meaning would have been local for Spenser as a resident of 
Cambridge, and he probably had it in mind, with some special refer- 
ence to the loud barking of the dog. 

^^ Cf. Herford, Introduction, pp. xlvi-viii, for instance. 

^' Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, p. 577. 

"^^ Cooper, Athenae, I, p. 442; Musgrave, Obituary (Harleian Soc. 
Fuhl.), II, p. 90. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 137 

widow of Dr. William Turner, Dean of Wells, had become 
the second wife of the bishop in 1568.-^^ The first name of 
this person, although of no great importance, was probably 
Thomas, for we find that a certain Thomas Awder, gentle- 
man, who died in 1599, resided at Somersham.-^* As we 
shall presently see, Bishop Cox's brother-in-law also lived 
in Somersham, and therefore, on account of the compara- 
tive rarity of the name Awder, this Thomas was probably 
the same person. The main point, however, is that the 
names Awder and Lowder bear a close relation to each other 
both in spelling and in sound. I, for one, am willing to 
believe that this likeness is something more than chance, 
and that in this coincidence, in view of Spenser's known 
methods in the use of allegorical names, we have the key 
to the solution of the fable. The poet chose that dog-name 
which happened to bear the closest resemblance to the name 
of the person whom he wished to represent. The result is 
that this similarity between the dog's name Lowder, un- 
known in the literature of the time but no doubt frequently 
encountered in rustic life, and the surname Auder or 
Awder, then in use but by no means common,-^^ is some- 
thing more than mere chance. 

^'Anthony a Wood in his Atlienae Oxonienses misspells this name 
Ander and Inder; Strype also inaccurately writes it Ander. Both 
are evident misreadings of MSS., for elsewhere the name always 
appears as Auder or Av^der, generally the latter. 

^* Index of Wills Proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury 
{1383-1604), IV, p. 20 {Brit. Eec. Soc., no. 25). 

"° In my researches through all the State Papers of the time which 
are catalogued either in the Calendars of the Eecord Office or in 
the Hist. Mss. Commission reports, through parish registers, church 
records, wills, inquisitions, and other contemporaneous documents, I 
have encountered eight persons of this name, exclusive of those living 
in Cambridge. Five of these evidently belong to the same family 
(London), that of William Awder, probably another son of Alderman 
George Awder of Cambridge {cf. letter of William Turner, Camden 



138 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

To support this theory, however, it might be considered 
advisable to discover motives for this satire on the part of 
Spenser beyond a mere dislike of the corrupt practices of 
Elizabeth and her courtiers. Owing to the notoriety of 
Lord North's shameful attempt at Church pillage and to 
the residence of the bishop near Cambridge, where the 
poet resided, this might not be thought necessary. Addi- 
tional testimony, however, hurts no theory, and I will 
therefore present further evidence. Dr. Richard Cox 
might be called one of the fathers of the Church of Eng- 
land. Born about 1500 he entered King's College, Cam- 
bridge, proceeding B.A. in 1523-4. Subsequently he went 
to Oxford, where he was created M.A, in 1526, but was 
obliged to withdraw soon after on suspicion of holding 
Reformed opinions on religion. Several years later he 
became chaplain to King Henry and also to Cranmer, and 
in 1541 received the archdeaconry of Ely. Other colla- 
tions soon followed, and about 1544 he became tutor to 
Prince Edward. In 1546 he was appointed Dean of Christ 
Church, Oxford, and in 1547 almoner to King Edward, 
Chancellor of Oxford University, and a member of the 
Privy Council. He was one of the most prominent Re- 
formers of the time, and took an important part in the 
compilation of the Book of Common Prayer, published in 
June, 1548. Among other preferments he received the 
deanery of Westminster in 1549. Upon the accession of 
Mary he lost all his offices and was imprisoned in the Tower. 

Soc. Publ., 2d s., pp. 3-4). George Awder died probably before 
June, 1549 (cf. ibid.), and his widow, if she took up her residence in 
London as Dr. Turner intimates, may have been the "olde Wydowe", 
Agnes Awder, who was buried April 26, 1576 (Harl. Soc. Publ., XXX, 
p. 128). A second George Awder, who held the vicarage of Foxton, 
near Cambridge, and who died before February 10, 1592 (Ely Epis. 
Bee, p. 451), was probably another brother of Thomas Awder and 
Mrs. Cox. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 139 

His confinement lasted only a short time, and in 1554 he 
escaped from the realm. During his exile he resided prin- 
cipally at Strasburg and Frankfort ; at the latter place he 
opposed John Knox on the proposal for discarding the 
Prayer Book. On the accession of Elizabeth he returned 
to England, and was elected to the rich see of Ely in 1559. 
In spite of his age and his great services to the advance- 
ment of the Protestant religion, however, Elizabeth seems 
to have always treated him inconsiderately. In the begin- 
ning of her reign she forced him to alienate some lands 
from his see, and during most of the time from 1574 until 
his death in 1581 he was persecuted by Hatton and North, 
as we have seen.-^*' The reasons for the Queen's dislike of 
Cox, even before the beginning of his troubles with Hatton 
and North, seem to have been chiefly these : in 1559 he wrote 
to the Queen, along with Parker, Grindal, and others, ask- 
ing her not to alienate certain Episcopal lands in exchange 
for gifts of impropriate rectories and remission of tenths; 
about the same time he wrote to her, objecting to the use of 
the crucifix in the Chapel Royal; in 1560 he, along with 
Parker and Grindal, wrote a letter to her, urging her to 
marry; he married a second time at the advanced age of 
sixty-eight. Froude, indeed, attributes Elizabeth's deci- 
sion not to help the Hollanders in January, 1569, to her 
anger at the news of Cox's marriage.-^'^ At any rate, it is 
evident that many incidents in the case of Cox tended to 
arouse the peculiar and unjust motives which so often actu- 
ated her conduct towards ecclesiastics. 

Such is the man whom I believe that Spenser defends in 
the person of Roffy. Owing to the Queen's treatment of 
him in his old age, especially the alleged "proud prelate" 

^* These incidents in Cox 's life are taken chiefly from the memoir in 
Cooper, Athenae, I, pp. 437-45, although other sources of information 
have also been used. 

^' History, IX, p. 383. 



140 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

letter, in which she is made to say that she would unfrock 
him, and which is nothing but an "absurd fiction",-^* Cox 
has been reproached as "a sordid, worldly-minded pre- 
late". "For this imputation we are convinced there is no 
solid foundation. It is to be regretted that Queen Eliza- 
beth's conduct towards this prelate was by no means such 
as an old and faithful servant of her father and her 
brother, who had suffered exile for conscience' sake, could 
have anticipated."^^" Finally, it may be said that he was 
a warm friend of Spenser's patron, Archbishop Grindal,-*'' 
and that he maintained a close friendship and correspon- 
dence with the prominent Continental divines of the Re- 
formed Churches, Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Gualter, and 
Cassander, to all of whom the Puritans so greatly de- 
ferred.^*^ 

Bishop Cox, however, had special connections with the 
University of Cambridge which would have ensured him the 
affectionate interest and respect of the poet. Over the 
colleges of St. John's and Peterhouse he possessed, as 

^ The story of this letter is encountered wherever the name of 
Cox occurs. Even the historians, Hallam and Froude, lightly treat it 
as unvarnished truth. Cooper (Athenae, I, pp. 441-2) has traced it 
to its origin and has clearly proved it absolutely unfounded. 

^' Ibid., p. 444. 

^° Cf. Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 611-2. for the strong letter which 
Cox wrote to Burghley in vindication of Grindal at the time of the 
latter 's sequestration. 

^' The recent examination of the MSS. of the see of Ely has thrown 
new light upon the character of Cox. Dr. Jessopp, appointed for this 
purpose by the Hist. MSS. Commission, speaks of the care exer- 
cised by Cox in the admission of worthy men to the ministry of the 
Church. ' ' The generally received belief that during Queen Eliza- 
beth 's reign the ordination examination was a mere form^ and that 
admission to the ministry of the Church of England was easily to be 
obtained by very incompetent persons, receives no support from this 
register as far as the diocese of Ely is concerned" (quoted by Gib- 
bons, Ely Epis. Records, p. 143). 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 141 

Bishop of Ely, the jurisdiction of visitor, and in this 
capacity he seems to have acted with moderation through- 
out the stormy scenes which were constantly enacted in 
Cambridge. In regard to his dealings with the University 
during Spenser's residence, he served on the special com- 
mission which in 1569 expelled Philip Baker, the unpopular 
Catholic Provost of Bang's College. Although he also 
occupied a seat on the commission of 1572, which passed 
unfavorably on the petition of the Puritan element against 
the new statutes,-*- he had Grindal for colleague,^*^ and 
both must have been equally unpopular with the peti- 
tioners.^** In his capacity as visitor Cox was likewise 
called upon to settle certain disputes in St. John 's College. 
In the year 1573 the fellows preferred to the bishop articles 
which they had drawn up against their master, Dr. Nic- 
olas Shepherd, charging him with "protracted absence 
from the college, beyond the statutable limits ",^*^ and with 
maladministration of the college property. A visitation of 
the Bishop of Ely resulted in the expulsion of this man and 
the appointment of Dr. Still, the friend of Harvey and 
Spenser, in his place.-*"' This case has a great many cross- 
currents, and illustrates the inexpediency of drawing any 
hard and fast distinction between Puritans and Anglicans 
which shall cover all questions. Shepherd, ' ' who had been 
brought in for the express purpose of repressing the Puri- 
tan faction at St. John's,"-*^ became Puritanically in- 

=^ Strype, Whitgift, I, pp. 33-6. 

^^ Cooper, Annals, II, pp. 280-1. 

'" It is noticeable that Cartwright did not sign this petition, and it 
is evident, therefore, that it did not represent the whole Puritan party 
in the University. 

=** MuUinger, I, p. 266 ; Baker-Mayor, p. 166. 

-""' Strype, Whitgift, I, pp. 140-2 ; Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 450-4, 

="' MuUinger, I, p. 266. 



142 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

clined,-*^ and was considered a Puritan by the other 
Heads.^*'' At the same time, however, he was a corrupt 
administrator, and was hated by the fellows of his own 
college, most of whom were Puritans.-^" He was succeeded 
by a man who had at first favored Cartwright, but who 
failed to gain the good-will of the fellows. Briefly, these 
are the main features of this case which Cox had to decide. 
His visitation was characterized by moderation and fair- 
ness, and lasted nearly one year (July, 1573-Easter, 
1574).^^^ The factions in this college, however, continued, 
and the bishop, probably at the instigation of Still, sug- 
gested to the Chancellor (Burghley) in December, 1575,--^'^ 
the appointment of a commission to revise its statutes. 
The latter acted favorably upon this suggestion, and eon- 
firmed the commissioners whom Cox had nominated. It is 
worth while to remember that Cox was not required to asso- 
ciate a commission with himself in the revision of these 
statutes, and this "proposition . . , reflects the more credit 
on its author in that the powers of the Visitor himself 
were, in the sequel, thereby considerably diminished ".^^^ 
Other bishops, Sandys,-^'* for instance, were charged with 
greed in making numerous visitations merely for the pur- 
pose of collecting their procuration fees. This proceeding, 
therefore, forms the strongest justification of Cox against 
the scandals circulated by his enemies, and must have 
revered him in the eyes of Spenser, who would have known 
at first hand of his disinterested principles of conduct, in 
direct contradiction to the libels of his persecutors. With 

=">" Strype, Whitgift, I, p. 87. 

^' Cooper, Athenae, II, p, 15. 

'^'^ Mullinger, ibid. 

-'^^ Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, pp. 450-4. 

"'Ubid., pp. 552-3. 

=»" Mullinger, I, p. 267. 

'=" Strype, Parker, 1, pp. 156-7. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 143 

this salient example, therefore, I shall conclude my remarks 
on Spenser's motives for defending Cox.-^^ In some way, 
the knowledge of which is now lost. Cox, like Grindal, may 
have befriended Spenser, and, although the poet's religious 
opinions at this time were Puritan, his sense of loyalty and 
justice impelled him to defend two Anglican bishops who 
were deserving of a fairer treatment from their Queen 
on account of their services to religion. 

Although Spenser's hatred of the traffic of the courtiers 
in Church livings might be held sufficient cause for his 
supposed attack on Lord North, even if his conjectured 
friendship with Bishop Cox is not taken into account, 
additional reasons of dislike are not far to seek. In the 
first place, this baron was a bigotted Catholic, the son of a 
noted trafficker in Church livings.^^® As that nobleman in 
Cambridgeshire next in rank and prominence to the Duke 
of Norfolk, he held positions which rendered him unpopu- 
lar in the University. On May 31, 1569, the college 
authorities wrote to Cecil, complaining that North in his 
capacity as a Commissioner of Musters "had in the pre- 
ceding week threatened to muster the servants of scholars' 
servants, contrary to the privileges of the University ".-^'^ 
As a freeman of the town he was said by these authorities 
to be opposed to the University. The result of this petition 
brought down a sharp reprimand from the Council to 
North, by which he was forbidden "to moleste any maner 
of waies at this tyme contrary to ther Charters ".'^^ In 
December of the same year Lord North committed some 
scholar to the pillory for ' ' evyll and fowlle wordes ' ' spoken 
against the Mayor of Cambridge, intimating that he should 

^' Cox was also the patron of at least three churches in the town 
of Cambridge, vis. St. Peter 's-on-the-Hill, St. Giles's and Trinity. 
'^ Camden Soc. Pull., 77, 1st s., pp. 264-5. 
=^' Cooper, Annals, II, pp. 240-1. 
^=» Ibid. 



144 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

have lost his ears and paid a fine of £100.^^'' At this same 
time the academic authorities alleged that North had con- 
ducted himself with severity towards the University in 
various matters/"*' especially in regard to the musters, 
which they preferred to see levied directly by Burghley or 
the Queen, and not by Lord North, In the January fol- 
lowing, a disagreement arose between North and the Vice- 
Chancellor in regard to a matter of jurisdiction.-**^ Finally, 
in June, 1572, he succeeded the popular Duke of Norfolk as 
High-Steward of the town, and the contrast between the 
sentiments entertained by the members of the University 
for these two noblemen is remarkable.^®- The most impor- 
tant testimony in regard to the present issue, however, is 
contained in a letter which Lord North despatched to the 
Vice-Chancellor on August 3, 1580. In this he bitterly 
complains that "your scholars do dayly and most out- 
ragiously rail against me", by whom he himself and his 
servants had been "vilely used". This state of affairs had 
long been in existence, for North had formerly "com- 
plained" without redress "of outragious deedes and words 
despitefully and villanously ministred against" him. 
Furthermore, he mentioned by name particular scholars 
who had vituperated him, and he threatened to carry the 
matter before the Privy Council unless the University 
authorities at once adopted measures to punish his assail- 
ants.^**^ The extremely bitter tone adopted by North in 

==' Ibid., p. 249. 

^'« Ibid. 

=«^ Ibid., p. 250. 

^'^ In Norfolk 's case it will be remembered that the University 
authorities petitioned Burghley to urge the Duke to remain firm in the 
matter of his resignation from the High-Stewardship of the town, 
an action which he had taken because of his serious displeasure with 
the townsmen. 

"'^Heywood and Wright, Cambridge University Transactions, I, pp. 
292-5. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 145 

this letter is the best proof which we could desire of the 
profound dislike with which the members of the University 
had long regarded him. In his attack upon this nobleman 
Spenser was therefore expressing the general sentiment of 
a large body of men. 

It remains to consider the appropriateness of the inci- 
dents which occurred in North's persecution of Cox to the 
fable of Roffy and Lowder. Diggon Davie, it should be 
noted, divides his account of the dealings of Roffy and 
Lowder with the Wolf into two parts, the last of which 
(11. 212-225) refers to a proceeding of earlier date than 
the one first described. Now Lord North had at first tried 
to obtain the manor and park of Somersham, for the 
keepership of which Cox had once granted him a patent.^^* 
In this proceeding he was unsuccessful, probably because 
the utter shamelessness of the whole transaction compelled 
the Queen to realize that she would seriously undermine 
the prestige of the Anglican hierarchy if she countenanced 
open robbery of the most important possessions of the sees. 
The fact that North's attempt to gain Somersham preceded 
his attempt on Downham is clearly established by two 
letters of Cox, one written to the Queen shortly after June 
18, 1575, the other to Burghley, November 21, 1575, in each 
of which Somersham forms the "bone of contention" to the 
exclusion of any reference to Downham.^"^ Now, in Spen- 
ser's description of this second incident, Roffy is repre- 
sented as absent when the Wolf makes his raid. The latter 
deceives Lowder by imitating Roffy 's voice, and, when he 
has enticed him out-of-doors, he attacks him : 

" And, had not Roffy renne to the steven, 
Lowder had be slaine thilke same even." 

(11. 224-5) 

^"Strype, A7mals, II, pt. 2, pp. 575-6. 

"^'Ibid., pt. 1, pp. 539-42, pt. 2, pp. 567-9. Cf. also Cox's letter 
to Dr. Masters, ibid., pt. 1, p. 539. 

11 



146 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

I interpret this as meaning that Awder, in his capacity as 
one of Cox's higher officials, attempted to restrain North 
from entering into possession of Somersham, but that he 
would have been unsuccessful had not Cox come to his rescue 
and vigorously opposed North. This is entirely probable, 
because Awder resided in the township of Somersham, 
where his brother-in-law had granted him a lease of twenty 
acres of land.^"® Further evidence is not accessible con- 
cerning Awder 's connection with Somersham, and, owing 
to the fact that the laborious researches of Cooper and 
Strype have unearthed so little about him, it probably does 
not exist outside of the archives of the diocese of Ely. As 
I have said, however, it may be fairly imagined that Awder 
as brother-in-law and as auditor to Cox resisted North's 
attempt to enter into the property. 

The first incident described by Spenser (11. 180-207), on 
the other hand, I believe relates to North's later and more 
violent attempt to secure the manor and park of Downham. 
This place was situated at about three miles distance north 
of Ely and at about sixteen from Cambridge. The bishop, 
writing to Burghley, December 29, 1575, states " that he 
(North) had lately bought a title of one Austen Stj^ward; 
and on that pretence had made entry upon his park at 
Downham, by colour of a lease; and that if he were not 
by and by, by some means stayed, he feared he would enter 
impetuose' ■ r^'' This attempt at forcible entry, however, 
was frustrated, for in November and December of 1575 
the bishop was living at Downham, "there, it seems, to 
keep possession against his foresaid enemy that pretended 

^* Ihid., pt. 2, p. 595. This fact, taken in connection with the 
reference previously cited from the Calendar of Canterbury Wills, 
makes it practically certain that Thomas was the first name of 
Bishop Cox's brother-in-law. 

''''Ibid., pt. 1, pp. 542-3. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 147 

to his park there".-''* This man Styward, who had been 
keeper of the bishop's park at Downham, seems to have 
been guilty of many delinquencies in this office. Although 
he did not at first hold the lease of this manor, he bought 
the residue of it from one Meggs, and shortly afterwards 
sold his interest to North. The latter, according to the 
bishop in a letter of December 11, 1573,"*^^ "strait upon the 
sale hath made an entry in great hast, not only on the farm, 
but also upon my park, wherein my dwelling house doth 
stand : which the farmer, unto whom the lease was first made 
by bishop West, in the fourteenth year of King Henry 
VIII, never enjoyed". Now Cox had "made a re-entry for 
lack of payment of rent"-^" into the farm of Downham; 
in other words, he had quite fairly declared the lease for- 
feited. North, however, who had bought up this lease, 
attempted not only to keep the farm but to seize the park 
and house also.^^^ The matter, as already stated, was tried 
in court, but, although it hung fire for some time, North 
never succeeded. The point of the whole transaction is that 
the bishop forestalled North's effort to lay hold of Down- 
ham park by taking up his residence there in November, 
1575, and forced him to disgorge the property to which he 
had laid title, just as Roffy "let out the sheepes bloud" at 
the Wolf's throat. Now the proceedings for the forfeiture 
of this lease, before the bishop made a re-entry upon the 
farm, must have taken place in the bishop's court of Audi- 
ence, in which judicial causes touching local episcopal 
property were heard, and which was presided over by his 
brother-in-law, Awder. It is not improbable that Awder 
himself may have made the actual re-entry after he had 
declared the lease forfeited. At any rate, he certainly must 

"^Ihid., p. 539. 

^^^ Lemon, p. 507. 

"" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 588-9. 

^' Ihid. 



148 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

have assisted Cox in his opposition to this suit brought by 
North, for he is spitefully attacked in the various allega- 
tions preferred by that nobleman.-''^ 

This is the whole of the account of this disgraceful pro- 
ceeding which has come down to us in accessible form. It 
accurately fits the details of the first incident in the tale 
of Roffy. The strong praise of Lowder (11. 180-3) may 
have perhaps been due to an acquaintance between Spenser 
and Awder, who probably often visited Cambridge, the 
former home of his father. The description of the "wicked 
Wolfe," which follows (11. 184-92), is a device common to 
the fable and to the pastoral, and in this case it is espe- 
cially applicable to North, who "had glutted his gulfe" 
with his father's ill-gotten gains of Church property. The 
fact that North was a Catholic illustrates the further pro- 
priety of applying the word ivolf to him. To push this 
theory further, it might be said that the disguising of the 
Wolf in sheep's clothing excellently represents the actions 
of North in hiding himself behind a suit preferred by an- 
other (Styward), and then in covertly buying the latter 's 
lease. In the light of my theory, moreover, the lines, 

" Long time he used this slippery pranek. 
Ere Roffy could for his laboure him thanck." 

(11. 200-1) 

find a peculiar significance, for the continuance of North's 
corrupt practices are testified to by Cox himself, who 
declared in his letter to Burghley of December 29, 1575, 
* ' that he had done more for him than any nobleman in Eng- 
land. "-^^ 

Another point is also striking; emphasis is twice placed 
on the fact that the Wolf could imitate the voices of both 

"= Ihid., pp. 577-84. 
=" Ibid., pt. 1, p. 542. 



THE SEPTEMBER ECLOGUE 149 

Lowder and Roffy (11. 190-1 and 215-8). In or before 
1575 Cox had appointed North High-Steward of the isle 
of Ely,-^* and this nobleman characteristically used this 
position for his own emolument and to the injury of the 
bishop.^'^^ The Wolf masquerades in sheep's clothing and 
imitates shepherds and dogs, in order to work havoc among 
the sheep ; North masquerades in an ecclesiastical office 
given him by the bishop, and pretends a zeal for righteous- 
ness in imitation of the latter, although secretly aiming 
only at his own gain. Finally, the vigorous feeling which 
pervades the satire throughout this fable breaks forth into 
a righteous delight in retribution which could scarcely be 
called forth by any event with which Spenser w^as not 
familiar : 

" At end, the shepheard his practise spyed, 
(For Roffy is wise, and as Argus eyed,) 
And when at even he came to the flocke, 
Fast in theyr folds he did them locke, 
And took out the Woolfe in his counterfect cote. 
And let out the sheepes bloud at his tbrote." 

(11. 202-7) 

This, and Diggon's outbreak at the Wolf, 

" Mischief e light on him, and Gods great curse ! 
Too good for him had bene a great deale worse ; " 

(11. 212-3) 

are the strongest evidences of personal feeling, I believe, 
which are to be found throughout the entire Calender, 
and I know of no other incident of Church corruption 
with which it is probable that Spenser could have been 
more familiar than with the controversy between the 
Bishop of Ely and Lord North. 

^^ Cooper, Athenae, II, pp. 290-1. 
^" Strype, Annals, pt. 2, pp. 573-4. 



150 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

And so I have come to the conclusion that Roffy, the 
"wise", "Argus eyed" "old man", whom Spenser so 
affectionately described (11. 172-9), and with whom he was 
connected in some unknown way, was Dr. Richard Cox, one 
of the fathers of the English Church, who suffered exile for 
religion's sake, and who deserved a better treatment in his 
old age at the hands of his sovereign. In defence of his 
Anglicanism it may be said that, although he served con- 
tinually on the Ecclesiastical Commission, and although his 
letters are sometimes characterized by sharp criticisms of 
the Puritans, he seems always to have acted leniently to- 
wards them, and to have lived up to his own statement 
(1575) that he had "forgiven more (ecclesiastical offend- 
ers) these sixteen years, than I can presently tell of", 
and that he doubted not but that he could ' ' make a book of 
a great sum" of these.'^® Although Thomas Sampson, the 
prominent non-conformist Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, 
wrote a sharp letter to Grindal charging him with a lordly 
and pompous life,-" no such Puritan attacks on Cox are to 
be found. In the cases of both these venerable ecclesiasts, 
Spenser's sense of loyalty for past favors and his genuine 
indignation at their unjust treatment outweighed the in- 
creasing and less worthy tendency of Puritanism to lay 
all faults at the bishops' doors. 

(6) Conclusion: Relation to the Puritanism of the 
'^Faerie Queene" 

This solution of the September eclogue brings the dis- 
cussion of Spenser's political and ecclesiastical satire to a 
close. Though summaries are tedious, and though I have 
no desire to weary the chance reader of this volume, I must 
briefly condense the results of the preceding investigation. 

"« Ibid., p. 573. 

»" Strype, Parker, III, pp. 319-23. 



Spenser's Puritanism 151 

Starting from a basis of historical fact, and using the 
information thus gained in connection with the known facts 
of Spenser's life, I have endeavored to give a consistent and 
logical explanation of the contents of these polemical ec- 
logues. The "February" is a political attack on the policy 
of Queen Elizabeth's government and on its chief director, 
Lord Burghley. The poet has here laid hold of the most 
important domestic event of the decade (1570-80) — the 
execution of Norfolk — upon which this policy lay open to 
attack. In the May eclogue he has indulged in a long 
Puritan satire on specific abuses in the Church of England, 
in which he touched upon the irreligion of the lower 
clergy, the corruption of the patrons, the spoil of Church 
property made by the ecclesiasts for ,the benefit of their 
families, the political ambition of the higher dignitaries 
and the Epicurean philosophy by which they regulated 
their lives, and the departure from the pattern of the Apos- 
tolic Church, As a symbol of this inherent corruption, 
which he believed due to the remnants of Catholicism still 
lurking in the Church, he set up a notorious Anglo-Catholic, 
Dr. Andrew Perne, with whom he had come into opposition 
at Cambridge. To give weight to these charges, he warned 
his party to beware of the corrupt and unfair dealings of 
the Anglicans, and again singled out for particular denun- 
ciation the chief exponent of their policy, emphasizing 
his hatred by an attack of a personal nature. In the July 
eclogue he has concentrated his satire on the "lordship" 
and pomp of the bishops, symbolized by Aylmer, instead of 
at the lower orders, and has boldly spoken out in favor of 
a former benefactor who had been disgraced on account of 
his favorable inclination to Puritan innovations. In the 
September eclogue he renewed his vituperation of various 
ecclesiastical corrupt practices, such as the traffic in Church 
livings, the system of fines, the unfair oppression of the 



152 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

lower orders by the higher, the pride and pomp of the 
ecelesiasts, and, finally, the depredations of courtiers on 
Church property. This last abuse is the underlying idea of 
the eclogue, and provokes the fiercest satire in the whole 
Calender. Here the poet again boldly defended a friend 
and benefactor, who had been persecuted by a Cambridge- 
shire nobleman. Lord North, whom the members of the Uni- 
versity regarded with deep aversion. The notoriety of this 
proceeding, its transaction in the neighborhood of Cam- 
bridge, and its singular appropriateness to the incidents 
of the fable, render Spenser's meaning almost certain. 
Finally, in these two last eclogues, although the poet has 
dropped specific allusions, the same current of hostility to 
Burghley and his policy is apparent. Of this great noble- 
man Spenser has given us his opinion at this time, which 
does not seem to have undergone any change during the 
remainder of his life.-'® This may be found in the descrip- 
tion of the all-powerful "false Foxe" of the Mother Huh- 
terd's Tale (11. 1137-1203 ).2^^ 

The idea that Spenser was reckoned by his contempo- 
raries an out-and-out Puritan at this time of his life seems 
to me in^MtTO^ttible. The very fact that he wrote these 
polemical eclogues at all, that he attacked Aylmer and 
defended Grindal, for instance, is proof that the govern- 
ment must have regarded him in that light. On the other 

-" The Euines of Time (Globe ecL, p. 494) ; Faerie Queene, VI, 
sii, 41. 

"" The following lines in this passage form an interesting parallel 
to my interpretation of the February fable, for they evidently allude 
to the fall of the Duke of Norfolk: 

"But he no count made of Nobilitie, 
Nor the wilde beasts whom armes did glorifie, 
The Eealmes chiefe strength and girlond of the crowne. 
All these through fained crimes he thrust adoivne, 
Or made them dwell in darknes of disgrace; 
For none, but whom he list, might come in place. ' ' 



Spenser's Puritanism 153 

hand, such epithets as "lovers of Lordship" (eel. vi, 1. 
123), "these wisards welter in welths waves" (eel. vii, 
1. 197), and "they setten to sale their shops of shame" 
(eel. ix, 1. 36), for instance, in addition to the tone and 
point of view throughout, are unmistakably part and parcel 
of the weapons of the controversial Puritan. Similarly, 
the familiarity of the poet with specific ecclesiastical abuses 
which the Puritans alw^ays condemned is another mark by 
which he may be known. From his point of view, the 
beauty of the satirical pastoral was that tradition had 
sanctioned its use as a means of attacking a dominant 
ecclesiastical hierarchy, a proceeding which dovetailed with 
the Puritans ' use of pastoral language. 

It is interesting to discover to what extent this early 
attitude varied from that which he assumed in 1590 and 
later, and to account for the reasons which produced 
changes in his views. To answer the question properly, a 
few different opinions from persons whose knowledge has 
entitled them to speak with authority must be presented, 
out of which a digested judgment may be formed of the 
Puritanism of the Faerie Queene.-^^ James Russell Lowell 
(1875), after remarking that in his youth "Spenser was 
certainly a Puritan, and probably so by conviction", re- 
corded the following opinion : 

" It is very likely that years and widened experience of men 
may have produced in him their natural result of tolerant wisdom 

'** Of these writers, one is a woman who has devoted a considerable 
amount of time to the study of Spenser's philosophy. Of the others, 
one was a celebrated American poet and man of letters, another a 
Church of England ecclesiastic, another an American professor of 
literature, while the last is a rising scholar of the present generation 
connected with one of our growing universities. Each one is entitled 
to speak with some authority on Spenser, and their selection has been 
based partly on account of this qualification, partly because of the 
difference in their occupations, interests, surroundings, etc. Their 
composite view is therefore likely to be near the truth. 



154 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

which revolts at the hasty destruetiveness of inconsiderate zeal. 
But with the more generous side of Puritanism I think he sym- 
pathized to the last. His rebukes of clerical worldiness are in 
the Puritan tone, and as severe a one as any is in ' Mother Hub- 
berd's Tale ', published in 1591. There is an iconoclastic relish 
in his account of Sir Guyon's demolishing the Bower of Bliss 
that makes us think he would not have regretted the plundered 
abbeys." . . .'** 

This view represents the early and later Puritanism of 
Spenser as almost identical. Dean Church (1879) pre- 
sents another aspect of the question. After remarking in 
the early part of his biography that Spenser's "puritanism 
was political and national, rather than religious" — a prop- 
osition which is, of course, true not only of Spenser but of 
practically all active, thorough-going Puritans of that 
age,^^^ because political questions were largely concerned 
with religion — , that he ' ' had the Puritan hatred of Rome ' ', 
and that he ' ' agreed with the Puritans in denouncing ' ' the 
"ignorance, laziness, and corruption ... in the Church 
system". Dean Church concludes that "he had a sense of 
the poetical impressiveness of the old ceremonial, and the 
ideas which clung to it, its pomp, its beauty, its suggestive- 
ness, very far removed from the iconoclastic temper of 
the Puritans". In support of this view of Spenser's later 

'^^ Prose Works, IV, pp. 314-5. 

-'- The remarks of Church on ' ' the stern austerities of Calvinism, its 
fierce and eager scholasticism . . . , the internal characteristics of the 
puritans, their distinguishing theology, their peculiarities of thought 
and habits, their protests . . . against the fashions and amusements 
of the world" (pp. 16-17) apply to a later period of English history, 
and hold true only of a few bigots or fanatics in Spenser 's age, whose 
opinions the great body of English Puritans did not share. At the 
time when they appeared (before 1580) the Puritan treatises against 
the stage, among other matters, of Northbrooke and Gosson were by 
no means unmerited, and were directed at prevalent social abuses, not 
at habits and customs which were free from taint in themselves. 



Spenser's Puritanism 155 

drifting apart from Puritanism, he quotes the following 
sentence from the View of the Present State of Ireland 
concerning the ruined condition of the churches : ' ' the out- 
ward form (assure yourself) doth greatly draw the rude 
people to the reverencing and frequenting thereof, what- 
ever some of our late too nice fools may say, that there is 
nothing in the seemly form and comely order of the 
church ".^^^ Furthermore, Church, believing the quotation 
aimed at the Puritans, declares that Spenser "had not 
much . . . love for 

" That ungracious crew which feigns demurest grace."^^* 

(F.Q., VII, vii, 35) 

Professor Theodore W. Hunt, in a short article entitled 
Edmund Spenser and the English Reformation (1900),-^^ 
has briefly discussed the poet's ''attitude, inside the sphere 
of Protestantism, toward the Calvinism and Puritanism of 
the time as distinct from Anglicanism' \^^^ His general 
idea is that "Spenser assumed a rational and moderate 
position midway between the extremes of a bigoted Puritan- 
ism and an equally bigoted Anglicanism",-®^ and that "be- 
tween an intolerant Anglicanism and an intolerant Puritan- 
ism and Calvinism he preferred the former".^®* In oppo- 
sition to the statement of Church based on the preceding 
quotations from the View, Hunt has remarked that Spen- 
ser insisted "that an unduly elaborate ceremonial would in 
the end react on the usefulness and very existence of the 
organization". Finally, he concluded that Spenser was 

-"" Church, op. cit., p. 113. 

"** Op. cit., p. 115. 

'^'^ Bibliotheca Sacra, LVII, pp. 39-53. 

^« Op. cit., p. 49. 

=" Op. cit., p. 50. 

=»' Op. cit., p. 51. 



156 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

not a Dissenter and "that he favored a modified Angliean- 

The following theory emanates from Miss Lillian Win- 
stanley in an article upon Spenser and Puritanism. ~^^ The 
opening portion of her essay is taken up with the doc- 
trines of Calvinism, which, in the time of Elizabeth, fur- 
nished the belief not only of the Puritans but of the 
Anglicans themselves. The ground upon which the two 
parties split, as we have seen more than once before, related 
to matters of Church government. In regard to the earlier 
work of Spenser, Miss Winstanley has concluded that he 
"threw himself heart and soul into the cause of Cart- 
wright",-"^ and that on the main question of Church dis- 
cipline he "sided as strongly as possible with the Puri- 
tans".-''- From this conception of the poet's attitude in 
youth she proceeded to consider his later Puritanism in 
respect to the fashions of the day, showing that "he pro- 
tests vehemently against extravagance in dress ",^''^ that he 
"hates dancing and fortune-telling",-''* also "masquing, 
dice, cards and 'billiards farre unfit' ",-''^ and "the frivo- 
lous love-making so characteristic of the courtier of his 
day".-"'' On the question whether his Puritan convictions 

-*" Op. cit., p. 50. Unfortunately, this last clause is so vague as to 
lose much of its intended weight. The great body of English Puritans 
under Elizabeth were endeavoring to eradicate what they considered 
abuses in the Church, and hoped to accomplish their aims by modify- 
ing the Anglican system, not by breaking away altogether, as they 
did later. They, therefore, in general ' ' favored a modified Anglican- 
ism", at least up to the last years of Spenser's life. 

^Mod. Lang. Quarterly (1900), III, pp. 6-16, 103-10. 

-'" Ibid., p. 13. 

-'- Ibid., p. 16. 

-"'^ Ibid., p. 103; Faerie Queene, I, x, 39, and I, iv, 14. 

-^* Ibid., p. 103; Faerie Queene, I, iv, 25. 

-=' Mother Eubberd's Tale, Globe ed., p. 520. 

="" Op. cit., p. 104. 



Spenser's Puritanism 157 

'^weakened in later life", the author found this to some 
extent true, attributing the alteration to the "influence of 
Elizabeth Boyle" which was reflected in the lighter tone 
of the three later books of the Faerie QueeneP"^ The con- 
clusion of the whole matter is that in the three earlier 
books of the Faerie Queene, as well as in the Shepherd's 
Calender, Spenser "is Puritan in every sense that the word 
admitted of in his time, in doctrine, in his theory of church 
discipline, and in the severe tendency of his morals ".-^^ 

The writer most recently to discuss this subject is Mr. 
F. M. Padelford, who in a most interesting and suggestive 
study, The Political and Ecclesiastical Allegory of the 
First Book of the "Faerie Queene" (1911), has presented a 
slightly different theory of the poet's attitude toward the 
Puritans. After pointing out that there were various 
shades of Puritanism, as well as many degrees of Protes- 
tantism,"''^ he has identified the poet's religious attitude 
with that of Archbishop Grindal. "In the parlance of to- 
day, Grindal was not a dissenter, but a Low Churchman, 
and the presumption is that Spenser, who expressed such 
warm admiration for him, was of the same school."^"*' His 
theory of Spenser's later attitude toward Puritanism is, 
like Church's, influenced by the conjectured reference in 
the line beginning "like that ungracious crew" and by the 
Jonsonian supposition that the Blatant Beast stands for 
the Puritans.^*'^ Padelford, however, who has emphasized 
the poet's "preference for the golden mean", does not dis- 
associate the latter 's position in the Calender from that in 
the first books of the Faerie Queene. 

The preceding series of views represents the mature, 

^" Ihid., p. 109. 

^'Ibid., p. 110. 

^' Op. cit., p. 6. 

»«• Ihid., p. 8. 

*»' In Faerie Queene, VI, xii, 23-5, 



168 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

scholarly opinion of writers qualified to judge. Each one 
of these opinions is influenced by the temperament, voca- 
tion, and habits of life of their respective exponents, and they 
accordingly differ somewhat from one another. The result 
of the selection, however, is that the student of Spenser 
cannot go far wrong in his conception of the poet's later 
attitude to Puritanism if he forms a judgment based on a 
composite photograph of this series.^"^ 

Now all these writers acknowledge that Spenser's senti- 
ments toward the Puritans changed in his later work, the 
Faerie Queene; they differ only in regard to the extent 
of this change. Lowell and Miss Winstanley maintain that 
the alteration from the radical tendencies of his early point 
of view is small, while Hunt and Padelford find that his 
later ecclesiastical views mediate between orthodox Angli- 
canism and Puritan fanaticism. The other writer, Dean 
Church, infers, on quotations from works composed in the 
last years of his life, that he even developed a spirit of 
opposition to the Puritans. 

The preponderance of opinion, as far as these writers are 
concerned, considers the Puritanism of the Faerie Queene 
as the expression of a Low Churchman who no longer 
sympathized with the violent trend of fanatical Calvin- 
ism. Padelford 's theory that Spenser was a Low Church- 
man even when he composed the Calender, and Hunt's 
idea that he took sides in the Cambridge controversy with 
Whitgift rather than with Cartwright, are controverted 
by his attacks on the lordship, pride, and pomp of the 
bishops, which could proceed from no one who supported 
methods of compromise. The defence of Grindal is the 
defence of a friend who ran counter to the policy of 

^"^ Their general views on the nature of the Puritan satire in the 
Calender have been quoted in order to show what influence these might 
have had on their opinions of the same aspect of the Faerie Queene. 



Spenser's Puritanism 159 

Elizabeth and Burghley, the subject of Spenser's satire, 
and carries a warning to the Puritans against seeking ele- 
vation to the Anglican hierarchy. The theories of these 
two writers, as well as that of Church, also require modi- 
fication on another point, — i. e. the identification of the 
Blatant Beast with the Puritans. This remarkable crea- 
tion, which represents the spirit of envious detraction, 
especially against the innocent, and which in its specific 
applications becomes at various times identified with differ- 
ent matters and movements, is connected in the last canto 
of the sixth book of the Faerie Queene (st. 23-5) with the 
Church. Although it is hazardous to depend too much 
upon historical chronology in Spenser, it is improbable that 
the attack of the Beast on the churches here represents 
"the suppression of the monasteries" under Henry VIII, 
as one writer has endeavored to make out,^"^ because of the 
identification of Calidore either with Essex or Sidney. In 
combination with the references in the View to "our late 
too nice fools" and their objections to the beauty of church 
architecture, and to 

" That ungracious crew which f aines demurest grace," 

this attack by the Blatant Beast on the ornaments of the 
service (st. 25) may be regarded as a fling at the Puritan 
fanatics, the pamphleteers of the Martin Marprelate con- 
troversy. But to maintain that this feeling indicates an 
antagonism to the Puritans is to show a profound ignor- 
ance of later Elizabethan history. The great body of Eng- 
lish Puritans did not support the Martinists ; in fact they 
repudiated them as bringing a taint on their religion.""* 
Even Cartwright declared "that from the first beginning 
of Martin unto this day I have continually, upon any oc- 

*"* Winstanley, op. cit., p. 110. Padelford has clearly identified this 
transaction with an incident in F. Q., I, iii (cf. op. cit., p. 19). 
^*Neal, I, p. 193. 



160 spensee's shepherd's calender 

casion, testified both my dislike and sorrow for such kind of 
disorderly proceeding ".^°'^ Spenser's friend Harvey, whose 
controversy with Nashe touched upon topics connected with 
the Marprelate libels, sufficiently recorded his opposition 
to the Martinists.^"*' Accordingly, the poet's rebuke to the 
latter offers no inconsistency with his Puritan ideas, polit- 
ical or religious. 

The last part of this division must occupy itself with the 
causes for the change in Spenser's Puritanism from the 
fierce, searching radicalism exhibited in the ecclesiastical 
eclogues of the Shepherd's Calender, to the Low Church 
position of the Faerie Queene. In partial explanation 
of this alteration in his religious views the following four 
reasons may be offered. The first is the more mature and 
tolerant point of view produced in him by the mild influ- 
ence of years and by what Lowell calls his "widened ex- 
perience of men". These tended to temper the extremity 
of the Reformed opinions of many a hot-headed Cambridge 
undergraduate. John Still, the friend of Harvey,^°^ who in 
his youth had espoused the side of Cartwright at Cam- 
bridge,^''^ considerably departed from his earlier tenets, 
and received a series of preferments which culminated in 
the bishopric of Bath and Wells. Dr. Eichard Rowland, 
who likewise at first upheld the Puritan attacks of Cart- 
wright against the ecclesiastical hierarchy, was advanced 
to the see of Peterborough fifteen years later, when he had 
apparently softened the Puritan severity of his early opin- 

'"^ Letter dated October 4, 1591, given in Strype, Annals, IV, 
appendix xxxix. Cf. also Neal, I, p. 195. 

"'^Pierce's Supererogation (1593), in Worls (Grosart), II, pp. 197 
ff., 204-5, etc. Cf. also Maskell, History of the Martin Marprelate 
Controversy, p. 216. 

^' Works (Grosart), I, p. 9. 

"»Mullinger, I, p. 219; Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 467. 



Spenser's Puritanism 161 

ions.^°® Many other instances of this change from radical- 
ism to conformity might be cited. 

The second reason may be found in the residence of the 
poet in Ireland, far off from the struggles of religious 
factions. Here, the common cause which the small body of 
the Protestant English had to make against the vast major- 
ity of the Catholic Irish contributed to deflect his Puri- 
tanism from attacks against the Anglican system to the 
common enemy of both, the Church of Rome, Amid the 
fierce and cruel conflicts between Saxon and Hibernian 
there existed scant incentive to call in question the lordship 
of prelates or the internal corruptions of the Church 
system. The main aim of both Anglican and Puritan in 
Ireland lay in protecting the Protestant Church from the 
encroachments of the Pope. 

The third reason results from Spenser's employment by 
the government, which served to bring out all his latent 
patriotism. The great changes produced in the external 
aspect of his life on his transference to Ireland became the 
natural cause of an alteration in the radical trend of his 
Puritanism. Perhaps he retained for a long time after his 
residence in this strange land the intensity of his earlier 
convictions, but he no longer made his writings a vehicle 
in which to convey them.^^*^ In the extremely interesting 
theory of Padelford on the first book of the Faerie Queene 
we accordingly find that Spenser's spirit of patriotism had 
caused him to defend the progress of the Reformed religion 
against the efforts of domestic foes in its purely historical 
aspect, while, in the latter books, his Puritan sentiments 
found utterance in the description of the defence of Bel- 
gium and of the overthrow of Philip of Spain. For patri- 

*" MuUinger, op. cit., pp. 219, 272; Cooper, op. cit., pp. 287-8. 

*"The Mother Eubberd's Tale, in its general cast of thought, must 
be regarded as the expression of Spenser's early views, before he left 
England. 
12 



162 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

otic reasons, his interest has been transferred from censure 
of the internal policy of the realm to an historical repre- 
sentation of his sovereign's position as the "Defender" of 
his country's ''Faith" against those who would subvert it. 

The last reason relates to the private life of the poet ; it 
is the influence produced by the power of his love for 
Elizabeth Boyle.^" The later books of the Faerie Queene 
contain the love-makings of his knights, Artegal, Calidore, 
Timias. The sweet charm of Spenser's beautiful, ennobling, 
and absorbing passion tended to withdraw his interest from 
the religious controversies of the day. To the rapturous 
lover of the Epithalamion the crooked and corrupt meth- 
ods pursued in the Anglican system of Church government 
no longer assumed that paramount importance in his esti- 
mation which they had previously attained. 

Such is a rational explanation of the connection of Spen- 
ser's early religious convictions with his later Puritan 
ideals, together with an account of various causes which 
contributed to soften the radical trend of this early Puritan 
opposition to the policy of the government, until he finally 
adopted the point of view of a Low Churchman. 

'" Lilian Winstanley, op. cit., p. 109, has presented this theory. 



CHAPTER II 

THE BIOGEAPHICAL EELATIONS OF THE SHEPHEIIB'S 
CALENDER 

The aim of the present chapter is to discuss the Shep- 
herd's Calender as a poem closely connected with the life, 
the literary opinions and aspirations, and the friends, of 
its author, to assess accurately the value of previous views 
upon these subjects, and, in several cases, to put forth ex- 
planations hitherto unoffered, which, it is hoped, may afford 
suggestions to other writers upon Spenser. Accordingly, 
the topics here treated have been divided into separate 
tracts, which in turn have been ranged in groups wherever 
their nature permits. On this plan the articles on E. K. 
and Cuddie come under one division, those on Palinode, 
Piers, Diggon Davie, and Thomalin under another. The 
first of these groups relates to Edward Kirke, the second 
to men who, in one way or another, were connected with 
the academic or ecclesiastical struggles of the time, and the 
third to the poet's patron, the Earl of Leicester, and his 
relatives. The tracts upon Rosalind and upon the Areo- 
pagus obviously require separate discussion. Finally, the 
article upon Spenser's biography stands naturally at the 
conclusion, as an attempt to give a logical account of his 
actions during the years 1576-1580, the course of which 
was so profoundly influenced by the Puritan satire of the 
political eclogues. 

Of the methods pursued in regard to the identification of 
persons who are represented under pastoral names, brief 
mention should be made at the outset. In the use of proper 
names which were intended to refer to living persons, 

163 



164 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Spenser's practice throughout the whole course of his alle- 
gorical poetry varies considerably, and exhibits consistency 
at any one time only in variation. Nevertheless, it is pos- 
sible to find five well-defined varieties of these names. The 
first class is composed of anagrams, of which the following 
may be given as examples: Algrind for Grindal ^= 'Edmund 
Grindal, Archbishop of Canterbury ; Morrell for Elmore = 
variant for the name of John Aylmer,^ Bishop of London; 
Philisides^ for Philip Sidney; Charillis^ for Elis. Carey = 
Lady Elizabeth Carey, the second daughter of Sir John 
Spencer of Althorpe. In the second class may be placed 
names which are only partial anagrams, or which bear an 
obvious likeness in spelling or sound to the names of the 
persons intended: Artegal or ArthegalP for Arthur Grey = 
Arthur, Lord Grey de Wilton ; Britomart for Britain = the 
warlike (due to the -mart = Mars, Martis) spirit of Eng- 
land;^ Burhon for Henry of B ou7\h on = Henry TV of 
France ; Irena^ for Ireland. The next class is divided rather 
in degree than in kind from the preceding, where the like- 
ness is less apparent and often exists only in one syllable 
of the invented name : Wrenock for Pemhroke'' = Pembroke 
Hall, Cambridge; Thearia for Anne = Anne, Countess of 
Warwick; Marian for Margrare^=: Margaret, Countess of 
Cumberland; Mansilia for MarcJiioness = Helena, Mar- 
chioness of Northampton.® The fourth class is composed of 
names which have only a very slight likeness to those of the 

^ His name was pronounced as if spelled Elmer. 
*In The Euines of Time. 

* In Colin Clout 's Come Home Again. 

* This is the less usual spelling {cf. Globe ed., p. 257, etc.). 

' This spirit, of course, becomes at times identified with Queen 
Elizabeth. 

« Globe ed., p. 297. 

^ Cf. Grosart, I, p. 46, note. With this identification I agree. 

*For these three names, cf. Todd, I, pp. ciii-iv. They occur in 
Colin Clout's Come Home Again. 



E. K. 165 

persons whom they denominate, often no more than an 
identity in the first letters, but nevertheless do possess that 
likeness, which the numerous examples found in Spenser 
prove to be not fortuitous: Hohbmol = Harvey, Daphne = 
Douglas Howard, Alcyon^= Arthur Gorges, Palin = Feele,^ 
and so forth. The fifth class is based on a different principle, 
and is composed of names which have a literary association 
with their originals, or which Spenser applied to some pecu- 
liar quality of the person intended: Cory do7i^= the literary 
appellation of the poet, Thomas Watson;^" Meliboe 
(Melibee) for Meliheus = ihe name applied to Walsing- 
ham by Watson; Urania for the Countess of Pembroke ::= 
used by Spenser as a compliment to her poetical attain- 
ments and to her patronage of poets ; Tityrus for a famous 
predecessor in poetry = formerly used by the pastoral 
poets to designate Virgil, but adapted by Spenser to signify 
Chaucer. The efforts to unravel the names of persons 
represented in the Shepherd's Calender have been accord- 
ingly directed in conformity with these varieties of denomi- 
nations. 

Merely a short introduction has been deemed necessary 
for the explanation of what is to follow in this chapter, and 
the reader may therefore now turn to the successive articles 
which attempt to throw light upon the life of Edmund 
Spenser through a study of this early poem. 

i. Edward Kirke 

Concerning the identity of the mysterious commentator 
of the Calender there have been four well-defined theories, e. k. 
Todd, writing in 1805, summarizes the view of his time, 
when referring to Spenser's letter to Harvey of October 5 
(16), 1579: "By the mention of Mystresse Kerkes . . . 

" Malone, II, p. 248. 

" Cf. his eclogue on the death of Walsingham. 



166 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

some have been led to assign the name of Edward Eerke 
to the old scholiast. Some also have not failed to suppose 
that King might be the name ; and, that the force of guess- 
ing might no further go, to imagine even the poet and the 
commentator the same person ! "^^ The first theory received 
strong support when the Messrs. C. H. and T, Cooper, in 
the course of their antiquarian researches for Cambridge, 
( discovered that an Edward Kirke had been a fellow-student 
^t Pembroke Hall with Spenser.^- At the same time their 
investigations showed that the first Edward King to be 
connected with Cambridge matriculated over twenty years 
after Spenser's departure. The principal exponents of the 
last theory mentioned by Todd have been two German 
scholars, viz. Dr. Uhlemann, who published an article in 
1888 entitled Der Verfasser des Kommentars zu Spensers 
Shepherd's Calender, and Dr. H. 0. Sommer, who pre- 
fixed to a reprint of the first edition of the Calender in 
1890 a reproduction of Uhlemann 's chief arguments. This 
theory received the support of Mr. Ernest Rhys, who con- 
fidently asserted in The Prelude to Poetry that **E. K., 
there is no doubt now, was simply Spenser himself ".^^ 
Although Herford^* has briefly replied to these views, no 
adequate answer has yet been given, and it therefore seems 
advisable to explode once and for all this theory which 
bobs up like a bottle in the ocean after each attempt to 
sink it. 

Of the principal points in the Uhlemann-Sommer theory, 
the convenient inaccuracy of E. K. in regard to the sources 
of the poem in certain places, especially where Mantuan 
and Marot are concerned, as these theorists contend, has 
arisen because the poet himself wrote these notes from 

'' Spenser, WorTcs, I, p. xxi, note. 

^- Notes and Queries (2d s.), IX, p, 42. 

'* Page 3. 

" Introd., pp. xxii-xxv. 



E. K. 167 

memory. "Spenser thought it necessary to here and there 
point out to his readers the very passages he imitated, and 
this he did from memory, not having his models at hand, 
and thus we can explain why his quotations are not always 
correct and complete. "^^ This view assumes that the com- 
mentator is endeavoring to give the correct sources. But 
in the December eclogue, which is closely modelled upon 
Marot,^® the commentator has nothing to say of this imita- 
tion, whereas he has already noted the relation between 
Spenser and Marot in the previous eclogue. Another com- 
mentator, as well as the poet, moreover, might cite from 
memory sometimes inaccurately and sometimes accurately.^'^ 
The second point deals with the somewhat intimate 
knowledge of Plato shown by the commentator in the notes 
to the January, October, and November eclogues. Here the 
contention is that it is "more reasonable to suppose that 
Spenser", who "devoted himself with zeal and pleasure 
to the study of Plato", and who composed two Platonic 
Hymnes about the time that the Calender appeared, 
"wrote the Commentary than to attribute it to an 'E. K.' 
about whom and about whose knowledge of Plato we have 
no knowledge whatever ".^^ Plato, however, was well known 
at Cambridge. Ascham, writing from there in 1547, bears 
witness that Plato and Aristotle were the most studied of 
the philosophers,^® both of whom were prescribed as text- 
books in philosophy by the new code of Edward VI 
(1549).^° There is nothing remarkable in Spenser's knowl- 

"Sommer, p. 20; Ulilemami, pp. 5-6. 

" His Eglogue au Boy, to which E. K. refers in the gloss to 1. 171 
of the "September". 

" Sommer remarks that " 'E. K. ' is generally accurate to the 
detail". This is untrue; E. K. makes errors continually, as any one 
who studies the gloss may see. 

" Sommer, p. 21. 

" MuUinger, I, p. 89. 

^ Ibid., p. 110. 



168 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

edge of Plato,^^ even though the study of Greek had begun 
to wane when he entered the University. Harvey, we know, 
was well acquainted with Plato,^^ and it is at least probable 
that any third person who shared the tastes of these two 
enough to be made a partner in their literary enterprises 
must have been also well versed in the writings of that 
philosopher.^^ 

The third argument arises from the remark which E. K. 
makes in the Generall Argument at the conclusion of his 
comments on the etymology of ' ' ^glogai " : " other curious 
discourses hereof I reserve to greater occasion". This 
' ' greater occasion ' ' Uhlemann and Sommer find fulfilled in 
Spenser's lost work, The English Poete (October "argu- 
ment"). Such an identification, however, leaps at the 
wildest conclusions. Even if E, K. is not speaking as 
many writers do who wish to avoid profuseness by cutting 
short their remarks, a place might easily be found for this 
half-promised treatise in the commentary which he is 
known to have composed for Spenser's Dreames.^* 

Another argument is concerned with the appearance of 
an English translation of a Latin distich of Cicero's, made 
in imitation of the Greek epitaph of Sardanapalus, in the 
gloss to the May eclogue. This distich practically coin- 
cides with two lines which Spenser had "translated" ex 
tempore for Harvey,^^ and which appeared in his letter of 
April 10, 1580. It is noticeable, however, that E. K. does 

'* That is, knowledge as considered apart from appreciation, 

'^Cf. his Rhetor, and WorTcs (Grosart), I, p. 69. 

^ Sommer is not very accurate. He remarks that " ' E. K. ' refers 
often to the writings of Plato" (p. 21). These references are limited 
to four, three of which (glosses to eel. i, 1. 59; x, 1. 27; xi, 1. 186) 
might have come from a second-hand knowledge of the philosopher. 
The fourth (x, 1. 21) refers to the origin of poetry, which would be 
the first thing which anyone would know in Plato's writings. 

'* Harvey, Works, I, p. 38. 

^Ibid., p. 36. 



E. K. 169 

not introduce these lines as his own, but merely by the 
statement, "which may thus be turned into English". In 
another place, moreover, E. K. quotes unpublished lines of 
the poet's.^** If Harvey was familiar with this translation, 
as Spenser certifies in his letter, there is no reason why a 
third person who was as intimately acquainted with the 
works of the poet as the commentator shows himself to have 
been should not have known these verses also. 

Still another argument, based on a quotation of Petrarch 
found both in the April gloss (to 1. 104) and in a letter of 
Harvey to Spenser,-^ is propounded to show that the poet 
and E. K. are identical. But this proves nothing. In Har- 
vey's letter of April 7, 1580, he says of Cambridge that 
"Petrarch, and Boccace" are "in euery mans mouth ".^* 
This quotation, 

" Arbor vittoriosa triomphale, 
Honor d' Imperadori et di Foeti:" 

would have been entirely too well known in Cambridge to 
limit its quotation merely to Harvey and Spenser. As the 
former says, it must have been "in euery mans mouth". 

These are the principal reasons used to concoct the 
theory that E. K. is Spenser himself, Uhlemann put for- 
ward a few others, but their nature is more trivial than the 
ones already presented. An unprejudiced judgment upon 
the arguments of these men must be that they are not only 
advanced with over-confidence, but that they depend upon 
a distortion of the known facts. As I have already inti- 
mated, the likeness between the gloss of E. K. and the 
known work or opinions of Spenser, so far as they exist at 
all, may be explained by the degree of intimacy which must 

** Cf. gloss to the October eclogue, 1. 90. 
'"Harvey, Worls, I, p. 81. 
='76i£i., p. 69. 



170 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

have existed between the poet and any friend qualified to 
edit his work. 

After a careful consideration of the Epistle, the several 
* ' arguments ' ', and the glosses of the Calender, on the other 
hand, it becomes evident that E. K. cannot be identical 
with the poet.^^ The difference in personality depends 
,upon two classes of reasons, the one dealing with literary 
taste, the other with knowledge of the contents and text of 
the Calender. Regarding the first division, it is evident that 
E. K. employs methods of praising the poet which it is im- 
possible to believe that Spenser himself could have used. 
In the "argument" to the November eclogue he remarks: 
'*this -^glogue is made in imitation of Marot his song, 
which he made upon the death of Loys the French Queene ; 
but farre passing his reache". At the very beginning of 
the Calender^" E. K. had doubted "if he (Marot) be worthy 
of the name of a Poete", with whose work he elsewhere 
shows a familiarity.^^ Although Spenser allowed these 
comments to appear with his poetry, it is hard to believe 
from what we know of him that he would have thus dis- 
paraged from his own lips a poet whom he had thought 
yorthy of imitation. Other comments, such as the pointed 
reference to the poet's humility in the Epistle,^^ where E. K. 
has the poor taste to quote a line (June eel., 1. 65) in proof 
of this which immediately follows a passage full of Hobbi- 
nol's "vaunted titles and glorious showes" in behalf of the 
poet, and such as the remark appended to 1. 153 of the 

^ The following proof is presented at some length, in so much as 
the arguments of such writers as Grosart {Spenser, I, pp. 118-20) are 
assertive, inconclusive, and calculated to injure the theory which they 
seek to vindicate. 

^ Introductory gloss to the January eclogue on ' ' Colin Cloute ' '. 

" Glosses to the February eclogue on the name Thenot, and to the 
September eclogue, 1. 171. 

^ Ed. Harford, p, 7, 11. 8-17. 



E. K. 171 

"November", which not only swells, but inflates, "the note 
of praise", could not have proceeded from Spenser. It is 
a far cry from the young poet's open acceptance of praise 
which exploited his unfledged work, to an absurd boasting 
of his own powers. 

As regards literary taste from another point of view, E. 
K. is opposed to the borrowing of foreign words, principally 
Latin, French, and Italian, after the common practice of 
contemporary versifiers, who "have made our English 
tongue a gallimaufray, or hodgepodge of al other 
speches".^* Spenser, however, introduces several words 
of foreign origin into the Calender, upon some of which 
E. K. comments. Of these the following are examples: 
Tamburins (vi, 1. 59), crumenall (ix, 1. 119), overture (vii, 
I. 28),^* stanch (ix, 1. 47), jouisance (v, 1. 25; xi, 1. 2), 
3Ielampode (vii, 1. 85),^* Teribinth (vii, 1. 86),^* cabinet 
(xii, 1. 17), Colinet (xii, 1. 18), equipage (x, 1. 114), and en- 
trailed (viii, 1. 30). 35 

Besides this difference in taste between the poet and the 
commentator in regard to words, it is clear that they also 
do not agree upon certain poetical contrivances, notably 
alliteration. In addition to his tirade in the Epistle against 
"the rakehellye route of . . . ragged rymers" who "hunt 
the letter", and who "without learning boste, without 
judgement jangle, without reason rage and fome",^^ he 
later objects to Spenser's use of alliteration: "I thinke 
this playing with the letter, to be rather a fault then a 
figure, as wel in our English tongue, as it hath bene alwayes 
in the Latin ".^^ Among these "rymers" E. K. names Gas- 

** Epistle, ed. Herford, p. 6, 11. 1-2. 
" E. K. notices this derivation. 

^ Although some of these had been used in English before Spenser, 
they had all been only recently imported. 
'• Epistle, ed. Herford, p. 6, 11. 32 ff. 
•'Eel. X, 1. 98, gloss. 



172 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

coigne as the most important,'*^ whom he does not consider 
a poet. From remarks which Spenser drops in his letters, 
however, it is evident that he felt it no dishonor to be a 
"rymer", for he applies this name to himself.^® Indeed, 
judging from the contents of the October eclogue on the one 
hand, and from its "argument" and the gloss to 1. 65 on 
the other, E. K. presents a higher conception of the poet 
than Spenser, 

If this divergence between the literary tastes of the poet 
and the commentator are not considered conclusive on their 
difference of identity, the reasons which I shall now advance 
must finally satisfy that question. The commentator makes 
mis-statements concerning the contents of the Calender 
which it is impossible that the poet himself could have 
made.** In the April gloss (to 1. 50) to the words Syrinx 
and Pan, who are here intended to represent Anne Boleyn 
and Henry VIII, E. K. remarks of the latter term: "And 
by that name, oftymes (as hereafter appeareth) be noted 
kings and mighty Potentates: And in some place Christ 
himself e, who is the verye Pan and god of Shepheardes ". 
In the eclogues which succeed the "April" Pan is indeed 
used a few times to designate Christ and also God, and in 

" Eel. xi, 1. 141, gloss. 

^° ' ' But I am, of late, more in love wyth my Englishe Versifying 
than with Eyming" (Harvey, Works, I, p. 8; cf. also pp. 16, 36). 

*" Some of Herf ord 's reasons under the question of the commen- 
tator 's "ignorance of things which Spenser must have known" would 
have been better omitted. He points (pp. xxiii-iv) to E. K. 's state- 
ments denying any knowledge of the identities of Roffy (gloss to eel. 
ix, 1. 176) and Dido (eel. xi, "argument"), which stand in contrast 
to his silence "with a purpose" on Algrind, where "he makes no 
profession of ignorance". It is just barely possible that E. K. did 
not know who Dido was, although he was free of the Rosalind secret 
(cf. eel. iv, 1. 26, gloss) which Spenser guarded so jealously. Con- 
cerning Roffy, however, it is impossible to believe that E. K. did not 
know the bent of the poet's satire. 



E. K. 173 

the ''July" the following line occurs in the description of 
the ' ' proude and ambitious Pastours ' ' : 

" Theyr Pan theyr sheepe to them has sold," 

(1. 179) 

By this Spenser probably spoke colloquially of the God of 
these unworthy shepherds, but E. K. added the cautious 
comment that ' ' theyr Pan" was the Pope. With tli^excep- 
tion of this one example and of the passage in the ' ' April ' ' 
under discussion. Pan is never used to designate "kings" 
or "mighty Potentates".*^ E, K., therefore, shows an un- 
familiarity with the contents of the Calender which it 
would be impossible to believe of the poet, who must have 
known what persons he had represented in his work. 

On the question of words the evidence is equally explicit. 
In many places E. K. gives a word a different meaning 
from that which it is obliged to hold in the text. Although 
these errors are more numerous in some eclogues than in 
others, examples occur in all the eclogues. On the name 
Colin Cloute (i, introd. gloss) E. K. states that the poet 
used this for himself instead of Tityrus, for instance, 
"thinking it much fitter then such Latine names, for the 
great unlikelyhoode of the language". The names Dido, 
Mcnalcas, Palinode, and Tityrus, all of classical origin, occur 
however, in the Calender. Spenser, therefore, did not look 
upon their use in English in the same light as E. K. In 
the second eclogue E. K. renders ay (1. 198) by evermore, 
a meaning which is slightly inaccurate. From its appli- 
cation, ever or always is the interpretation required by 
the sense. E. K. interprets assot (iii, 1. 25) as to dote, fail- 
ing to notice that it is used as a past participle and that it 

** It is possible that E. K. may have been recalling a gloss, per- 
haps afterwards suppressed, to the "soveraigne Pan" of the De- 
cember eclogue (1. 7). 



174 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

cannot have his nieaning.*^ Of stounds (v, 1. 257) E. K. 
remarks that it has occurred before ("aforesayde"), but 
this is untrue. He has probably confused it with some 
other word, such as stoure (i, 1. 51). He evidently did not 
understand what Tamhurins (vi, 1. 59) were, for he classi- 
fies them as "an olde kind of instrument, which of some 
is supposed to be the Clarion".*^ On the passage contain- 
ing the word Lyon (vii, 1. 21) E. K. comments: "thys is 
poetically spoken, as if the Sunne did hunt a Lion with 
one dogge". In the text, however, it is dogges (1. 22). 
Greete (viii, 1, 66) E. K. finds to be weeping and complaint, 
an inaccurate explanation, for the meaning is mourning.** 
On inly (ix, 1. 161) he remarks "inwardly: afforesayde". 
In the only place where inly has previously occurred (v, 1. 
38) E. K. has glossed it as entirely. Equipage (x, 1. 114) 
is rendered order, which fails to satisfy the true meaning of 
the text,*^ while welked (xi, 1. 13) is interpreted as short- 
ned or empayred, a meaning which it is improbable that the 
poet either here or in the January eclogue (1. 73) intended 
to give. Herford has noticed that these passages both indi- 
cate that the gloom of winter, rather than its shorter day, 
is referred to. To wither up, to make wane, from M. E. 
welken^= wither (trans, and intr.) was probably Spenser's 

*^ The sense required by the text is 'beguiled. E. K. makes an in- 
transitive out of a transitive verb. The point is, not that he did not 
understand the meaning or meanings of the word, but that he showed 
just enough unfamiliarity with the text to give a meaning which does 
not coincide with that intended by Spenser. The poet, on the other 
hand, must have known what he had himself written. 

^ Even if Spenser had never seen a Tamburin, he would not have 
commented hesitatingly on a word which he had used in the text. 

** This perhaps is only a slight inaccuracy, but it shows that the 
commentator was not intimate enough with the text to have been the 
writer of it. 

" Spenser intended a pageant with a great array or retinue of 
persons. 



E. K. 175 

meaning. In the last eclogue there is no striking example 
testifying to a difference of opinion between the poet and 
his commentator. The word scathe (1. 100) E. K. trans- 
lates into losse, hinder aunce. According to the New Eng- 
lish Dictionary its meaning at this time was hurt, harm, 
or damage, and these signify losse. Hinderaunce, however, 
is not an accurate synonym. 

The preceding are some of the errors which the commen- 
tator makes and in which the poet does not share. Other 
bits of carelessness of a slighter nature, such as \blacke 
(ix, 1. 97), which is glossed as hell, and the failure to 
follow the order of the text in the gloss, especially notice- 
able in the April eclogue, occur with some frequency. On 
the other hand, although better examples of blunders exist 
than some of those quoted above, this list has been selected 
with a view to showing that these errors are distributed 
throughout the whole poem. Perhaps Spenser did inter- 
sperse a comment here and there in the gloss,*® perhaps he 
did contribute the note on for ever to the "October", 
which Uhlemann finds so hard to attribute to anyone else, 
— although there are four noticeable blunders in this gloss, 
a number exceeded in no other eclogue — , but, even then, 
these must have been hurriedly made and confined to a very 
few places. The absence of comments upon the last part of 
the August eclogue, which contains Colin 's sestina, shows 
how hastily Spenser added to his poem and how unim- 
portant he regarded the gloss. 

**0f the point of Mr. Sidney Lee's remark (article on Kirke, D. N. 
B.) that "in his notes in the ninth eclogue 'E. K. ' announces that he 
owes one of his comments in part to the author ' ', I fail to perceive the 
force. E. K. must indeed have owed a great many of his comments to 
Spenser, for, unless he had been in the poet's confidence, he would 
have been unqualified to write the gloss. In the September eclogue, 
moreover, E. K, refers five times to the poet in a way which shows 
that he owed "his comments in part to the author". 



176 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

The result is that my theory does not differ substantially 
from another, which advocates the "joint editorship" of 
the gloss by Spenser and E. K. The object of Professor 
Fletcher's theory*^ is to find some common ground upon 
which the upholders of the two prevailing views can stand. 
He believes that the poet, who had left the editing of the 
Calender in the hands of E. K. in the beginning of 1579, 
when the latter described him as "for long time furre 
estraunged",*^ must have, upon his return, "gone over E. 
K.'s annotations with him, correcting, advising, suggest- 
ing", leaving the remainder of the gloss, however, to E. 
K.'s "sole discretion". His conclusion is that "the 'liter- 
ary apparatus' of the Shepheardes Calender is probably 
a composite piece of work, part of which Spenser had the 
opportunity to suggest and revise,*^ part of which he had 
not". If by this it is to be understood that in the actual 
composition of the gloss Spenser's contribution was exceed- 
ingly small, our theories reach the same conclusion. 

One has only to glance through Elizabethan collections 
of poetry, such as Davison's Poetical Rhapsody or Eng- 
land's Helicon, to see that literary men of that age con- 
stantly signed themselves by their initials. Dr. John Dee 
in his Diary ^'^ often alludes to an E. K. who turns out 
to be a certain Edward Kelly. In fact, the discovery by the 
Messrs. Cooper that an Edward Kirke matriculated as a 
sizar of Pembroke Hall in November, 1571, is as good evi- 
dence as need be that he was the commentator of the Cal- 
ender. Kirke subsequently removed to Caius College, 
whence he proceeded B.A. in 1574-5, and commenced M.A. 

"Mod. Lang. Notes (l&OO), XV, pp. 330-2. The reasons used by 
Professor Fletcher and myself are not the same. 

«lhe Epistle (ed. Herford), p. 8. 
' *^" Spenser was guiding the pen of ' E. K. ' but for a brief and 
hurried period only" (op. cit., p. 33). 

^Camden Soc. Fuhl. (1st s.), XIX, passim. 



E. K. 177 

in 1578. Soon after graduation he took orders, for on May 
26, 1580, lie was presented to the rectory of Risby in Suf- 
folk by Sir Thomas Kytson, its patron.^ ^ Now two refer- 
ences occur in E. K. 's work which allow the fixing of a date 
for the composition of the gloss. In the September eclogue 
(gloss to 1. 176) he speaks of Harvey's Gratulationum 
Valdinensium, "which boke, in the progresse at Audley 
in Essex, he dedicated in writing to her Majestic, afterward 
presenting the same in print to her Highnesse at the wor- 
shipfull Maister Capells in Hertfordshire". On this prog- 
ress of 1578 the Queen left Lord North's at Kirtling on 
September 3, and reached "Maister Capells" a few days 
later, making two short stops on the way.®- This assigns 
the date of Harvey's presentation of his book to the second 
week in September. E. K. 's Epistle, on the other hand, 
is dated April 10, 1579. Some time during this period of 
about seven months the gloss of the Calender was substan- 
tially composed.®^ Now it was just at this time that Kirke, 
v/ho had recently left the University, and who had evi- 
dently not yet decided on his life-work, would have had the 
time, and would have been willing, to act in the secondary 
capacity of a commentator upon the work of a fellow- 
collegian whom he admired. The manner in which E. K. 
speaks of Harvey and Spenser in the Epistle proves that he 
must have formed his friendship with them at the Univer- 
sity. This friendship and literary co-operation, moreover, 
is attested by the poet, who twice mentions E. K. in his 

"Spenser, Works (Grosart), III, p. cxi. 

'- Nichols, Progresses of Queen Elizabeth, II, p. 222. 

°' To the possible objection that the glosses to the different eclogues 
may have been written at various intervals of time, I will answer that 
such a view is extremely unlikely. Not until all the twelve eclogues 
had been collected for publication would a commentator have been 
apt to contribute his labors. The lack of a gloss to the sestina 
(viii) shows pretty conclusively that E. K. made no great additions 
after April 10, 1579, when he submitted his work to Harvey. 
13 



178 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

letters, in one case referring to E, K.'s friendship with 
Harvey and to his proficiency in the composition of Latin 
verse,^* in the other highly praising his work on the gloss 
of the Dreames.^^ 

In conclusion, it may be said that no reasonable doubt 
can exist at the present day concerning the identity of E. K. 
Just as Mantuan enjoyed the assistance of a friendly com- 
mentator, Jodicus Badius, so did Edmund Spenser receive 
the aid of his college-mate, Edward Kirke, in accordance 
with an approved convention of the pastoral. 

The name Cuddie is applied to an interlocutor in the 
cuddie February, August, and October eclogues. In the first- 
named this shepherd is described as "an unhappy Heard- 
mans boye" ("argument"), "whose person is secrete" 
(gloss to 1, 63), and who is represented as a disrespectful 
young fellow who scorns the sober counsels of old age; in 
the second he is a "neatherds boye" ("argument"), a 
"witelesse^® herdgroome", and the friend of Colin Clout, 
one of whose songs he recites ; in the third he is a " perf ecte 
paterne of a Poete" ("argument"), who expresses a desire 
for fame similar to that which actuated the living Spenser 
at this time. Whether or not the poet intended to repre- 
sent the same shepherd in each of these eclogues is of little 
importance; the Cuddie of the "October" is the only one 
who possesses any personal interest. 

"Harvey, Works (Grosart), I, p. 8. 

"Jfttd., p. 38. Although the two notices of a "Mistresse Kerke" 
in Spenser's letter of October 5 (16), 1579, first led, before the 
Coopers' discovery, to the supposition that E. K. stood for E. Kirke, 
the connection between the two persons is entirely hypothetical. 
Keightley (Notes and Queries, 3rd s., IV, p. 197) plausibly con- 
jectured that Mrs. Kerke may have been the proprietress of the Bull 
Inn, Bishopsgate Street, which Hobson, the Cambridge carrier, used 
as his London terminus. 

°° Blameless. 



CUDDIE 179 

From a remark which E. K. has appended to the latter 
eclogue (1. 1), various writers have sought to guess Cuddie's 
identity. The comment in question runs as follows: "I 
doubte whether by Cuddie be specified the authour selfe, or 
some other. For in the eyght ^glogue the same person 
was brought in, singing a Caution of Colins making, as he 
sayeth. So that some doubt that the persons be different." 
Todd^^ and Collier,^* following the lead of Thomas Warton, 
have been content to point out that Cuddie is not intended 
for Spenser on the strength of the latter 's reference to 
Colin Clout (11. 88-90) . This Craik understood ' ' as merely 
a little mystification in which the poet wantons with his 
readers" ;^'' he evidently considered Cuddie and the poet 
identical. Grosart did not think that there could be ' ' much 
doubt that covertly Spenser meant by Cuddie to represent 
himself ",^^ while Dean Church remarked that Cuddie was 
"perhaps for Edward Kirke".''^ 

That some person, other than the poet, was intended, we 
have further evidence than E. K. has given us. Harvey in 
his Gallant familiar Letter to Spenser disburdens him- 
self of the following remarks : ' ' For, I pray now, what 
saith M. Cuddie, alias you know who, in the tenth ^glogue 
of the foresaid famous new Calender? . . . But Master 
Collin Cloute is not euery body, and albeit his olde Com- 
panions, Master Cuddy and blaster Hohhinoll be as little 
beholding to their Mistresse Poetrie, as ever you wist, ' ' etc. 
Between these two sentences he has quoted twelve lines 
(11. 7-18) of the October eclogue. Upon one point, there- 
fore, these statements are eonclusive, viz. that Cuddie is not 

" Spenser, Works, I, p. 167. 

'" Spenser, Works, I, p. 118. 

*' Spenser and His Poetry, I, p. 79. 

** Spenser, Works, I, p. 442. 

" Spenser, p. 42. 



180 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Spenser.''- It is probable that he is some University friend 
of the poet's intimate enough to be classed with Gabriel 
Harvey. For my part I believe that Cuddie is intended for 
Edward Kirke, of whose authorship of the gloss I am con- 
vinced. 

As Herford remarked in his notes to this eclogue, neither 
''of the two discoursing shepherds*'^ entirely represents 
him" (Spenser). At the same time, Cuddie utters some of 
the opinions and aspirations of the poet, and therefore 
plays the part of an intimate friend. The closeness of this 
friendship is further attested by the same Cuddle's re- 
appearance in Colin Clout's Come Home Again, in which 
he and Hobbinol are the only interlocutors who formerly 
appeared in the Calender. The "mystification" which 
Craik found in E. K.'s comment evaporates if Cuddie is 
intended for Kirke. Craik forgot that the commentator, 
not the poet, was speaking in the extract cited from the 
gloss. Kirke must have seen that Spenser's readers might 
easily have taken Cuddie for the poet himself, since he is 
described as "the perfecte paterne of a Poete",®* and since 
he utters opinions which Spenser held. He therefore in- 
serted the above mentioned comment to give the reader a 
gentle hint that Cuddie and Colin did not represent the 
same person. Obviously he could not have spoken out on 
the subject of Colin as he did in the "September" gloss, 
for he would have disclosed his own identity. 

At the same time, I am well aware of one difficulty which 
stands in the way of this identification. The advice which 
Piers imparts to Cuddie on the subject of writing an epic 
poem, 

*- In Colin Clout 's Come Home Again Colin and Cuddie are also 
different persons. 
^^ Piers and Cuddie. 
** ' ' Argument ' ' to October eclogue. 



PALINODE 181 

" Abandon, then, the base and viler clowne ; 
Lyft up thy selfe out of the lowly dust, 
And sing of bloody Mars, of wars, of giusts." 

(11. 37-9) 

has been usually believed to point at the Faerie Queene. 
Furthermore, our meagre knowledge of Edward Kirke does 
not include the information that he ever wrote poetry, only 
that, as the friend of Spenser and the composer of the gloss, 
he entertained enthusiasm for that art. Nevertheless, the 
fact confronts us that Harvey in the passage quoted above 
distinctly separates Cuddie from Colin Clout. The only 
hypothesis upon which these seemingly opposite facts can 
be reconciled is that Spenser is pursuing in the October 
eclogue the loose kind of personal allegory peculiar to the 
Faerie Queene ; that he substantially identifies Cuddie with 
Kirke, but that certain matters pertaining to this character 
can be rightly understood only of himself. 

ii. The Interlocutors op the Ecclesiastical Eclogues 

One of the interlocutors of the May eclogue is Palinode. 
This name is of classical origin, and is undoubtedly adapted paiinode 
from the Latin word palinodia, commonly used in the 
theological writings of Spenser's day for recantation.^ Of 
recantation there had been numerous cases after the acces- 
sion of Elizabeth, and at Cambridge there M^as one salient 
example which eclipsed all others in notoriety. To Dr. 
Andrew Perne, the Master of Peterhouse from 1554 until 
1586, "the disputed theological questions of the day could 
scarcely have assumed that primary importance claimed 
for them by the most learned and distinguished of his con- 
temporaries".- "On S. George's day, 1547, he preached 
in the parish church of S. Andrew Undershaft, London, 

^ Cf. the epistle of Nicholas Brown in Strype, FarTcer, III, p. 2"1. 
- Mullinger, I, p. 180. 



182 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

maintaining as sound doctrine that the pictures of Christ 
and the saints were to be adored",^ an opinion which he 
recanted in the same church later in the same year. In 
1551 he accepted a position as one of King Edward's 
chaplains, appointed "to promulgate the doctrine of the 
reformation in the remoter parts of the kingdom".* After 
Mary's accession, although he argued in the first Convoca- 
tion of her reign against the Catholic doctrine of transub- 
stantiation, he subscribed the Roman Catholic articles of 
1555. It was during his Vice-Chancellorship of the Uni- 
versity (1556-7) that the bodies of Bucer and Fagius, the 
German Reformers who had died in Cambridge, were dis- 
turbed from their resting-place, and it was Dr. Perne who 
preached the condemnation sermon.^ In his next tenure of 
this office (1559-60), he presided over the senate when a 
grace was passed "without a dissenting vote that the 
degrees and titles of honor which the deceased (Bucer and 
Fagius) had enjoyed should be restored and all acts and 
proceedings against them and their doctrines be rescinded", 
a measure "which involved the strongest condemnation" 
of his previous conduct.** Finally, "in the convocation of 
1562-3 he signed the Thirty-Nine Articles, voted against 
the proposal to alter certain rites and ceremonies, and sub- 
scribed the petition of the lower house for discipline".'^ 

Such was the shuffling conduct of one of the most impor- 
tant academic dignitaries at Cambridge, and his very name 
became an epithet of reproach. "The scholars in merri- 
ment translated 'perno', 'I Change, I rat, I change often'. 
It became proverbial to say of a coat or cloak which had 
been turned that it had been 'Perned'. On the weather- 

* Cooper, Athenae, II, pp. 45-46. 

* lUd. 

* Cooper, ihid. 

« Mullinger, I, pp. 181-2. 
' Cooper, ihid. 



PALINODE 183 

cock of St. Peter's church in Cambridge were the letters 
A. P. A. P., which it was said might be taken to mean 
Andrew Perne A Papist, or Andrew Perne A Protestant, 
or Andrew Perne A Puritan, The puritan pamphleteers 
nicknamed him old Andrew Turncoat, Andrew Ambo, and 
old father Palinode, and called him a Judas. The noted 
John Penry is said, when at Peterhouse, to have berhymed 
Dr. Perne 's new statutes, and made a bye- word of his bald 
pate."* In the first of the Marprelate tracts he is called 
"Palinode D. Perne ",^ a name which was evidently well 
known. 

Taking this character of Perne which the Cambridge 
scholars imputed to him, and comparing it with a pas- 
sage in Harvey's letter to Spenser (April 7, 1580), the 
situation at once becomes clear. Among other items of 
news, the following appears : ' ' And wil you needes haue my 
Testimoniall of your olde Controllers new behauior? A 
busy and dizy heade, a brazen forehead : a ledden braine : 
a woodden wit : a copper face ; a stony breast : a factious and 
eluish heart: a founder of nouelties: a confounder of his 
owne, and his friends good gifts: a morning bookeworm, 
an afternoone maltworm: a right Juggler, as ful of his 
sleights, wyles, fetches, casts of Legerdemaine, toyes to 
mocke Apes withal, odde shiftes, and knauish practizes, as 
his skin can holde. He often telleth me, he looueth me as 
himselfe, but out lyar out, thou lyest abhominably in thy 
throate. "^° In a subsequent passage in one of the Foure 
Letters published in 1592, Harvey speaks of "my old Con- 
trowler, Doctor Perne ".^^ With the help of this reference 
alone, and without entering into Harvey's many bitter 

' Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 48. Penry was a member of Peterhouse 
from Dec. 3, 1580, until 1583-4, when he proceeded B.A. 
* Ed. Petheram, no. 1, p. 52. 
'"Harvey, WorTcs (Grosart), I, pp. 72-3. 
» Ihid., p. 183. 



184 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

attacks in his later works upon Perne, brought out all the 
more perhaps by the latter 's real or fancied opposition to 
Harvey on the occasion of his unsuccessful candidacy for 
the public oratorship at Cambridge in 1580, it is evident 
that Spenser's and Harvey's "old Controwler" was this 
same Dr. Perne, and that he had subjected Spenser to some 
sort of academic disciplined^ 

From these known facts in the life of Perne — viz. Spen- 
ser's dislike of him, his universal unpopularity among the 
Cambridge scholars, the ridicule to which he was subjected 
during Spenser's collegiate course as well as at other times, 
and the strong presumption that the name Palinode was 
applied to him long before the Marprelate controversy, 
where it appears as a well-worn epithet," — it seems al- 
together reasonable that in the person of the shepherd 
Palinode, whom E. K. labelled a Catholic, and whom Spen- 
ser intended for an Anglican who retained strong ' ' Popish ' ' 
traits, the poet was satirizing Perne. 

Following the general rule which I have adopted in my 
study of Spenser's sources,^* that shepherds of the same 
name represent the same person unless there is strong evi- 
dence to the contrary, I see no reason to suppose that the 
Piers of the May eclogue is not identical with the Piers of 
the "October". The character and opinions of Piers in 
each, so far as Spenser has revealed them, offer no incon- 

" Peterhouse is situated on the same street with, and almost oppo- 
site to, Pembroke, and it would therefore have been easy for Harvey 
and Spenser to come into daily contact with Perne. The latter, more- 
over, was Vice-Chancellor for the year beginning November, 1574. 

"Perne died on April 26, 1586. The Marprelate tracts did not 
appear until about 1588. These pamphleteers, therefore, were ap- 
plying Palinode to Perne as a name sanctioned by custom. 

" The reference is to a considerable amount of work which I have 
had occasion to do in connection with my study of Spenser. 



PIERS 185 

sistencies which it is impossible to reconcile. In each case 
he expresses certain views which the poet himself enter- 
tained; in the former he discusses ecclesiastical topics, in 
the latter the status of poets. The name Piers itself, 
which Herford classifies as rustic English,^^ was commonly 
used as a Christian name in Spenser's day, and would have 
been perfectly familiar to him in a literary way through 
the Vision of Piers Plowman. As a surname it would 
have been scarcely less familiar to that age, on account of 
Dr. John Piers, who held in succession the sees of Rochester, 
Salisbury, and York, receiving the first in April, 1576, and 
the second in November, 1577. 

Whatever name the original of Piers may have borne, 
from the facts that he is placed in opposition to Dr. Perne 
(Palinode), and that he imparts the advice of an older man 
to Kirke (Cuddie), or to some other young friend of Spen- 
ser's with poetical aspirations, or even to the poet himself, 
an older member of the University, a fellow, or perhaps a 
Head of a college, was probably intended. Judging from 
the contents of the two eclogues, this man must have been 
interested in both ecclesiastical and poetical topics, some 
one with whose views the Puritan Spenser could sympathize. 
As an absolute identification seems impossible, I merely 
offer the opinion that Piers may have been intended for 
Thomas Preston, best known to later times as the author 
of the tragedy Camhyses, which Shakespeare ridicules 
in the mouth of Falstaff. 

"What we know of Preston satisfies the requirements of 
the situation. In the first place, Spenser not only knew 
him, but probably enjoyed a certain amount of intimacy 
with him, for, in his letter of October 5 (16), 1579, from 
Leicester House, he cautions Harvey against showing his 
verses composed in classical metres to anyone except "your 

^^ Introduction, p. lix. 



186 SPENSER 'S shepherd's CALENDER 

verie entire friendes, Maister Preston, Maister Still, and the 
reste"/* In the second place, Preston possessed great 
talents, which first showed to conspicuous advantage at the 
time of the Queen's visit in 1564, when he was twenty- 
seven,^^ and when he had been a fellow of King's College 
for five years. "He acted so admirably in the tragedy of 
Dido, and acquitted himself so gracefully in a philosophical 
disputation and a valedictory address that her majesty, as 
a testimonial of her approval, gave him her hand to kiss, 
granted him a pension of £20 per annum during the royal 
pleasure, and bestowed upon him the title of her scholar. "^^ 
A man who had received such material recognition at the 
hands of the Queen was certainly in a position to advise 
any your Cuddie to sing of "fayre Elisa" and "the worthy 
whome shee loveth best",^® as the best means of gaining a 
livelihood. This sage counsel of Piers, bidding the young 
poet sing also "of bloody Mars, of wars, of giusts", would 
be peculiarly characteristic of Preston, who had achieved 
success with his "bloody" tragedy of Camhyses, written 
soon after September, 1569.-^ 

In the third place, Preston's ecclesiastical opinions draw 
him close to the Piers of the May eclogue. He wrote two 
ballads of a controversial character, the one entitled A 
geliflower or sivete marygolde, wherein the frutes of tyr- 
anny you may heholde (1569), and the other A Lamen- 
tation from Rome (1570). The latter describes the 
Pope's grief at the collapse of Northumberland's insurrec- 

^' Harvey, Works (Grosart), I, p. 9. 

" He was therefore fifteen years older than Spenser. 

"Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 248. Cf. narratives by Matthew Stokys 
and others in Nichols, Progresses of Queen Elizabeth, I, III. Cooper, 
Annals, II, gives the gist of all these. 

" October eclogue, 11. 45-7. 

^ An allusion in it occurs to the death of Bonner, which establishes 
this date. 



PIERS 187 

tion (1569), and incidentally exhibits the author's Puritan 
hatred of Romanism, Preston's Puritanism is further 
emphasized by his friendship with Gabriel Harvey, an out- 
and-out Puritan, by his subscription of the articles pre- 
ferred in 1569 against the Catholic Provost of his college, 
Philip Baker, along with other Puritan fellows,^^ and by 
his failure to obtain preferment, in spite of repeated recom- 
mendations and his own great talents, until 1584, when he 
became Master of Trinity Hall, a position of minor impor- 
tance owing to its wretched stipend. 

For these reasons, therefore, — personal friendship, simi- 
larity of interests in religion and poetry, and a general 
consistency between the characters of Preston and Piers, — 
I believe that Spenser may have had Preston in mind. The 
resemblance between the name used and the name of the per- 
son intended will probably seem slight to many. Hobbinol, 
we know, is Harvey, and yet beyond the first letters no like- 
nesses exist between the two names. From actual knowl- 
edge I can say that ' ' Hobby ' ' has been used as a nickname 
for Harvey, and perhaps this may have been true in 
Gabriel's case. In the same way Preston may have been 
called "Pres" for short, a word which is close to Piers in 
both spelling and sound. If arguments such as these 
appear trivial or foolish, I will refer the reader to Spenser's 
use of "Lobb"22 for Lobbin and of "Hobbin''^^ for Hob- 
binol, the former example occurring in the most serious 
and polished poetry in the whole Calender, and to the 
"fond foolerie" which characterizes Spenser's letters, 
noticeable, for example, in the names of "Angel Gabriel"^* 
and Rosalindula.-^ It is well to remember that, when he 

-' Strype, Whitgift, I, p. 35. 

-Eel. xi, 1. 168. 

^^Eel. ix, 11. 56, 74. 

-* Harvey, Works, I, p. 16. 

-'Harvey coined this word, but Spenser gave him the lead (cf. 
ibid., p. 38). 



188 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

wrote the Calender, he was still a member of, or had just 
left, an academic community where such nicknames, natu- 
rally adaptable to the rusticity of a pastoral poem, were 
heard upon every side.^** 

Unlike the interlocutors of Spenser's other "Moral" 
DiKgoji Davie ^clogues, with the exception of Morrell, Diggon Davie has 
been the subject of two theories of identification. Dr. 
Grosart-" identified him with Jean Vander Noodt, whose 
Theater for Worldlings (1569) contained an earlier ver- 
sion of eleven sonnets found in the Visions of Bellay and 
the identical first six sonnets of the Visions of Petrarch. 
Mr. Fleay in his Guide to Chaucer and Spenser thought 
it probable that he was Thomas Churchyard, the author, 
among other poems, of Davy Dickar's Dream. It seems 
to me that both theories are invalidated by the professions 
of Vander Noodt and Churchyard, neither of whom were 
clergymen. In Spenser's ecclesiastical eclogues a shep- 
herd who has a flock is meant to represent a clergyman. 
This meaning may be extended to include men who held 
positions at Cambridge, who presided over academic flocks, 
but it certainly should not be applied to a refugee like 
Vander Noodt or to an adventurer like Churchyard. Now, 
while Diggon Davie has once had a flock (1. 9),-^ it is notice- 
able that Hobbinol (Harvey), although the scene of the 
eclogue is laid in the vicinity of his home (1. 254), is no- 

^^ To the objection which can be urged against this theory that 
shepherds in Spenser's ecclesiastical eclogues generally represent 
clergymen and that Preston was not a cleric, I answer that Preston 
in the "May", as well as Harvey in the "September", are men 
who occupied official positions at Cambridge, and who therefore 
were supposed to guard academic flocks, even if they had not taken 
orders. 

" Spenser, WorTcs, I, pp. 25-8. 

=« Eel. ix. 



DIGGON DAVIE 189 

where described as the owner or keeper of a flock, for 
Gabriel Harvey was not a cleric. This home I take to be 
either Cambridge or Saffron Walden, preferably the 
former, because it was there that Spenser knew Harvey, 
and because it is the controversial atmosphere of that com- 
munity which these ecclesiastical eclogues reflect. The 
"farre countrye" from which Diggon has just returned, 
on the other hand, I take to be London, the head-quarters 
of ecclesiastical authority, as I have elsewhere declared.'^ 
With the location of the places to which reference is made 
established, let us turn to the details in the description of 
Diggon Davie. According to a remark of Hobbinol (1. 20) 
it has been nine months since he has seen Diggon. For- 
merly the latter had a "fay re flocke" (1. 9), but now he 
returns empty-handed and in a wretched condition (1. 8). 
The purpose of this journey had been to increase his worldly 
prosperity : 

" I dempt there much to have eeked my store," 

(1. 30) 

The result, however, had been entirely different : 

" The jolly shepheard that was of yore 
Is nowe nor joUye, nor shepeheard more." 

(11. 26-7) 

It is nowhere stated in the text, although E. K. speaks to 
that effect in the "argument", that Diggon took his sheep 
with him. At any rate, they are now in a woeful plight : 

"My seely sheepe (ah, seely sheepe!) 
That here by there I whilome used to keepe, 
All were they lustye as thou didst see, 
Bene all sterved with pyne and penuree : 
Hardly my selfe escaped thilke payne. 
Driven for neede to come home agayne." 

(II. 62-7) 

^' In the explanation of the satire of the September eclogue. 



190 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

When this pastoral language has been duly translated, it 
appears to mean that Diggon Davie, a Puritan divine,^** 
had departed from a living which he had enjoyed in the 
vicinity of Cambridge (''home agayne"), and had pro- 
ceeded to London. If his actions had been voluntary, his 
purpose had evidently been to seek a richer benefice; if 
they had not been voluntary, he may have been sununoned 
before the ecclesiastical commissioners for non-conformity, 
and perhaps deprived of his preferment. His utter de- 
spondency (11. 3-6, 11-14, 25-31, 56-67) gives some weight 
to this latter view. 

At this point a slight digression is necessary to account 
for a remark in the gloss. It occurs at the beginning: 
''The Dialecte and phrase of speache, in this Dialogue, 
seemeth somewhat to differ from the common. The cause 
whereof is supposed to be, by occasion of the party herein 
meant, who, being very freend to the Author hereof, had 
bene long in forrain countryes, and there scene many dis- 
orders, which he here recounteth to HobbinoU." The fact 
that Spenser's dialect is here somewhat more rustic or 
archaic than usual has long been generally accepted; the 
reason for this given by E. K., however, seems hardly con- 
clusive. Comparing those eclogues written wholly in ac- 
centual metre, the group in which Spenser's archaic dialect 
is most strongly marked,^^ the purely linguistic glosses of 
E. K. are found to be nearly the same in all three in pro- 
portion to the number of lines. In the February and 
September eclogues^- these glosses occur almost once to 
every six lines, in the "May" once to every seven. Over 
half of these comments in the "September", moreover, have 

*• Puritan, because of his attack on the authorities. 
'* Harford, pp. xlix-1. 

^ The proportion is identical in these, the percentage being ap- 
proximately 16 per cent. 



DIGGON DAVIE 191 

been already made by E. K. in the gloss to preceding 
eclogues. His statement, therefore, that the "Dialecte and 
phrase of speache , . . seemeth somewhat to differ from 
the common" did not make him feel obliged to append 
extra linguistic comments. In other words, if he believed 
it, his commentary fails to show this belief, and his remark 
was therefore probably intended to be misleading. In the 
same way, the reason given for this difference in dialect, — 
i. e. the absence of Diggon "in forrain countryes", where 
he had picked up a peculiar vocabulary, — cannot be ac- 
cepted as true. In the one hundred and eighty lines which 
are attributed to Diggon E. K.'s linguistic comments occur 
about once to every six lines ; in the case of Hobbinol, about 
once to every seven. This shows a slight support for the 
reason which E. K. has given, but it is counter-balanced by 
the fact that Hobbinol's conversation contains seven of the 
twenty words on which E. K. now comments for the first 
time.^^ It is impossible, therefore, to accept E. K.'s 
remarks either in regard to a more than usually pro- 
nounced difference in Spenser's language "from the com- 
mon", or in regard to the "cause whereof", i. e. the absence 
of Diggon in a " f arre countrye ' '. The only basis of truth 
for these comments arises from the fact that Hobbinol in the 
two opening lines uses the word her twice, each time in 
the unusual sense of you. Diggon replies by using it 
three times (11. 3 and 4) in the more usual sense of 
he. I therefore come to the conclusion that Diggon Davie 
cannot be considered a foreigner, and that E, K.'s state- 
ment is made to obscure his identity and that of the ' ' f arre 
countrye" to which he had resorted. In other words, the 
dialect has no bearing on the person of Diggon. 

^ This makes the proportion of words commented upon for the 
first time larger in Hobbinol's conversation, for he utters only 78 11. 
to Diggon 's 181 11, = about 5: 12. 



192 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Assuming, therefore, that Spenser's description of 
Diggon Davie can be translated in accordance with my 
theory of the political satire of this eclogue, — in short, that 
he represents a Puritan clergyman who has been absent 
from his living near Cambridge on account of a trip, volun- 
tary or otherwise, to London, — it does not seem impossible 
to establish his identity. I believe that he may have been 
intended for Richard Greenham, a prominent non-con- 
formist divine, whom Spenser almost surely knew. 

Greenham, who was born about 1535,^* matriculated as a 
sizar at Pembroke Hall on May 27, 1557. Proceeding B.A. 
in 1563-4, he was subsequently elected a fellow, and com- 
menced M.A. in 1567. Here he remained until November 
24, 1570, when he was instituted to the rectory of Dry 
Drayton, situated at about three miles' distance from Cam- 
bridge.^^ In the struggles which shook the University that 
year he sided with Cartwright, for we find his name ap- 
pended to the two letters of July and August written to 
Burghley in behalf of the Puritan leader.^*' Strype 's state- 
ment that he subsequently deserted Cartwright,''^ which 
has been copied by several writers,^^ is unsupported by 
direct evidence. The foundation for this seems to have 
been that he reproved the younger members of the Univer- 
sity for petty squabbles, and that he disapproved of the 
Marprelate tracts.^^ It should be remembered that Cart- 
wright expressed the same views.^" 

^* Diet. Nat. Biog. 

^ Fuller, Church History, V, p. 191. 

^^ Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 415, 417. 

*' Ibid., pt. 1, pp. 5-8. 

^ Cooper, Mullinger, Diet. Nat. Biog. Strype 's remarks on Green- 
ham are more than usually inaccurate. He speaks of him as a mem- 
ber of Christ's College, for instance. 

^ Clark, Lives (1677), p. 15. 

*" Dexter, Congregationalism, p. 157. 



DIGGON DAVIE 193 

This rectory at Dry Drayton Greenham held for about 
twenty years. In August, 1573, he married Katherine 
Bonde or Bound,*^ the widow of Dr. Robert Bound, 
physician to the Duke of Norfolk.*^ About this same time 
he wrote an Apologie or Aunsivere . . . unto the Bishop 
of Ely ; being commaunded to suhscrihe, and to use the 
Bomish habite*^ in which he declared his "plaine, deter- 
minate and resolved purpose", that he "neyther can, nor 
will, weare the apparell, nor subscribe unto it, or the com- 
munion booke".** It was probably at this time that the 
same bishop. Dr. Richard Cox, "sent for him, to appear 
about his Nonconformity: At which time the Bishop told 
him that there was a great Schisme in the Church, asking 
him where the blame was to be laid, whether upon the Con- 
firmists, or Non-conformists? To which he readily an- 
swered, that it might lie on either side, or neither side : For 
(said he) if they loved one another as they ought, and 
would do all good Offices each for other, thereby maintain- 
ing Love and Concord, it lay on neither side : otherwise, 
which party soever makes the Rent, the Schism lies upon 
their score. The Bishop was so pleased with this answer, 
that he dismissed him in Peace. "*^ Some time later, how- 
ever, probably in 1576 or 1577, Greenham was deprived of 
his living for a period.**' It is uncertain who deprived him, 
but it was probably not Bishop Cox, who had been leniently 

" Phillimore, Cambridge Parish Begisters, III, p. 70. 

*^ Cooper, AtJienae, II, p. 144. 

** Dexter, ibid., appendix, p. 7. 

**Ibid., p. 89. 

" Clark, Lives, p. 15. 

** Neal, I, p. 141 ; Peirce, Vindication of the Dissenters, p. 97. 
The chronology of Greenham 's life is in a rather loose state. Since 
the events to which these authorities refer, before and after alluding 
to Greenham, occurred in 1576-7, it is reasonable to accept this as 
the date of his deprivation. 

14 



194 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

disposed towards him, and who had certainly allowed him 
to continue in the living of Dry Drayton. It is very possible 
that it may have been the Ecclesiastical Commission, which 
summoned the more prominent and obstinate non-con- 
formists to London, especially when they had received easy 
treatment at the hands of their diocesan. Neither is the 
period of Greenham's suspension known. It may have 
been three, six, or nine months, or even a year, periods 
which include the more customary lengths of deprivation. 
At any rate, Greenham finally returned to his flock, where 
he exercised the greatest care for their welfare. 

As a fellow of Pembroke for at least a year and a half 
after Spenser's matriculation, as a broad-minded Puritan 
who devoutly administered the duties of his office by zealous 
and frequent preachings,*^ who sold corn to his poor 
parishioners during a period of dearth at a low rate to the 
loss of his own pocket, so that his wife was obliged to 
borrow money to ''get in his Harvest",*^ and whose con- 
scientious efforts were nullified by the ignorance and ob- 
stancy of his flock,*^ and as an eloquent divine who lived 
near Cambridge and often preached at St. Mary's, he must 
have possessed the reverential affection of the young Spen- 
ser. "He had a peculiar interest in young men, and in 
Cambridge young men, and a memorial of his to a person 
of quality pleads touchingly for such pecuniary aid as 
should at least keep them from being driven by hunger 
'into the Ministerie, both unseasonably and hurtf ully '. '"" 
Like Diggon Davie, he assailed various abuses in the 
Anglican Church, particularly non-residence,^^ the entrance 

" Clark, Lives, p. 14. Greenham was one of the most celebrated 
Puritan preachers of that day. 
*"* Ibid., p. 15. 
*' Fuller, ibid., p. 191. 
'" Dexter, p. 90. 
'^ Fuller, p. 192. 



DIGGON DAVIE 195 

of evil ministers, and the ''preposterous zeale and hastie 
running of young men into the Ministerie ' ' before they had 
arrived at a mature age. His interest in Cambridge stu- 
dents received its strongest example in Robert Browne, 
the founder of the Separatists, who was a member of Green- 
ham's household, along with other young men, for "a con- 
siderable period" about 1578.^- The reason which Browne 
gave for resorting to Greenham was that " 'he hard sai' 
that he 'of all others', was 'most forwarde' in religious 
reform ".^^ Perhaps Spenser and Harvey may have been 
visitors^* at the house of this Reformer, in whom Puritanism 
received one of its most noble exponents, and who chose 
to pursue his calling in this humble position rather than to 
receive preferment in that Church with whose government 
he was not in harmony.^^ 

Now the description which Spenser has given of Diggon 
Davie, when stripped of its pastoral dress, tallies pretty 
closely with what we know of Richard Greenham. The 
former has been away for nine months (1. 20) from his 
pastoral charge, which is situated near Harvey's residence, 
Cambridge, and during his absence he has visited the centre 
of ecclesiastical authority, London. This is probably what 
Greenham also did, and, although we do not know that he 
was absent for nine months, this period was a customary 
time-sentence for deprivation. The utter despondency of 
Diggon points to the conclusion that he had been suspended 
from his cure. If we are also to believe that Diggon wished 

=- Dexter, pp. 90-3. 

"^Ibid., p. 90. 

" A John Spenser received a license as a schoolmaster at Dry 
Drayton in 1577 (Ely Epis. Records, p. 173), and this may well have 
been the conjectured brother of the poet (Grosart, I, pp. xxxv-vi, xl; 
Fletcher, Encycl. Amer.). The John Spenser who followed the poet 
through Pembroke proceeded B.A. in 1577-8, and then left college. 

"*= Dexter, p. 90. 



196 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

to increase his "store", — i. e. to secure a richer living, — 
this motive may well have found a parallel in Greenham's 
life, whose parishioners proved so ignorant, obstinate, and 
unthankful that he actually left his living in 1591 or 
1592,^** after his friends had long importuned him, a pro- 
ceeding which he may have attempted before, at the time 
when Spenser was writing the Calender. In addition, the 
views which Diggon expresses, and the solicitude which he 
shows about the welfare of his flock, are characteristic of 
Greenham. Finally, Diggon warmly defends Roffy, whom 
I have shown strong reason to believe was intended for 
Bishop Cox, a proceeding which finds a parallel in the 
generous treatment of Greenham by this reverent ecclesi- 
astic, who evidently sympathized with the latter 's objec- 
tions to the Anglican Church. 

The actual connecting-link between the names of Richard 
Greenham and Diggon Davie hardly appears at first sight. 
In view of Spenser's peculiar and often far-fetched like- 
nesses between the name which he invents and the name 
which he wishes to represent, I believe that this relation 
can be established. Diggon or Dickon, which are only 
slight variations in the sound of the same name, is collo- 
quial or rustic for Richard. Its use is seen in the following 
distich, which was intended to warn the Duke of Norfolk 
against accompanying Richard III to Bosworth Field : 

" Jockey of Norfolk, be not too bold. 
For Dickon thy master is bought and sold."^^ 

The Davie in Diggon 's name is as close in sound to Dray- 
ton, where Greenliam lived, as many of Spenser's coined 
names are to their originals, and, if any of my readers are 
disposed to scout the possibility of the truth of such analo- 

"« Cf. Ely Epis. Becords, p. 449, 

^^ Burke, Peerage (ed. 1884), p. 981; quoted by Shakespeare in 
Eichard III, Act. V, Scene 3. 



THOMALIN 197 

gies, let them make a study of Spenser's use of anagrams.^^ 
After taking this link into consideration, therefore, and 
after noticing the parallels between the pastoral descrip- 
tion of Diggon and the life of Richard Greenham, remem- 
bering all the while that Spenser must have known the 
latter, I believe that this theory may be true. 

Thomalin occurs twice as the name of a shepherd in the 
Calender, and each time it is applied to an interlocuter. In ThomaUn 
the ' ' argument ' ' of the March eclogue E. K. remarks : * ' The 
speciall meaning hereof (of the eclogue) is, to give certaine 
markes and tokens to know Cupide, the Poets God of Love. 
But more particularlye, I thinke, in the person of Thomalin 
is meant some secrete freend, who scorned Love and his 
knights so long, till at length him selfe was entangled, and 
unwares wounded with the dart of some beautifull regard, 
which is Cupides arrow." Although it is possible that E. 
K. is speaking the truth, his right to be believed implicitly 
is seriously impaired by his false testimony on Spenser's 
sources. This eclogue, moreover, is a professed imitation 
of a Greek idyl ; it is a literary exercise apparently without 
any specific allegorical intention.^^ Indeed, E. K.'s com- 
ments are here concerned wholly with the pointing out of 
rhetorical beauties and with linguistic elucidation, and he 
makes no attempt in the gloss to interpret this tale allegori- 
eally except in a purely literary way.®*^ For these reasons it 
seems improbable that Thomalin designates any particular 

■^ Those who are sceptical of the value of anagrams in the study 
of Elizabethan literature I will refer to some potent remarks of 
Edmond Malone in his edition of The Plays and Poems of William 
Shakespeare, II, pp. 205-10, 222-4. 

"" In the Epistle E. K. remarks that one of Spenser's aims in 
writing the Calender was "to warne" his friends to beware of the 
folly of love. This eclogue may be an example of this general 
purpose. 

~ Cf. glosses to II. 23, 29, 97. 



198 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

person. Perhaps Spenser, who wished to stimulate all pos- 
sible interest in his book, may have allowed several of his 
friends to believe that they were each represented in the 
person of this shepherd, or perhaps E. K. wished to dis- 
guise the close imitation of the Greek poet by giving the 
impression that the contents described a contemporaneous 
love-affair. The eclogue, at any rate, is of too unrealistic a 
character to warrant efforts at an identification of its inter- 
locutors. 

The Thomalin of the July eclogue, on the other hand, 
appears in a poem which has a basis of fact in the outside 
world; Bishop Aylmer (Morrell) is his opponent and Arch- 
bishop Grindal (Algrind), whose sequestration he describes 
(11. 215-28), is his authority. E. K. does not hint that the 
poet is introducing one of his friends, for Thomalin is made 
the mouth-piece for an attack on the persecuting Bishop of 
London and his Anglican colleagues of that ilk. At the 
same time, this Thomalin can hardly be identical with the 
"March" shepherd, who is only a "shepheards boye", 
somewhat older than his confrere "Willye, and whose char- 
acter bears no resemblance to that of the stern opponent 
of clerical corruption. Since the Thomalin of the "July", 
therefore, seems to be distinct from his "March" name- 
sake, and since he appears in an eclogue which shadows 
actual events, I believe that he has an identity which it is 
worth while to establish. 

The name Thomalin Spenser has taken from the French,®^ 
like other names such as Perigot and Thenot, and it must 
have been unknown to English writers before the Calender 
appeared, for none of his editors have cited parallels. Con- 
sidering its French form, it is evidently a diminutive for 
Thomas, and, if we compare Spenser's general practice in 
the use of anagrams, it is legitimate to suppose that 

" Herf ord, p. lix. 



THOMALIN 199 

Thomalin may represent Thomas somebody. Thomalin is 
clearly a Puritan of no mean standing, whom Spenser 
thought prominent enough to place in opposition to Bishop 
Aylmer. Since he is the keeper of a flock (1, 8), he must 
have been a minister. Now the only eminent Puritan 
divines of this time {circa 1577) by the name of Thomas 
were Thomas Cartwright, Thomas Lever, and Thomas 
Wilcox,^2 Ijj every sense were they considered leaders of 
their party. Of these men, Cartwright had departed from 
England in December, 1573, and did not return until 
1585.®^ He did not come into contact with Aylmer until 
this latter year. Lever, who also had no relations with 
Aylmer, died in July, 1577. For these reasons Spenser 
would probably have not represented either of these men in 
the person of Thomalin. "We are left with Wilcox, and 
what we know of his life renders him a peculiarly fit sub- 
ject for Spenser's notice. 

Thomas Wilcox was born about 1549, became a "fellow 
or scholar in and about 1566" of St. John's College, Ox- 
ford,^* from which, for reasons now unknown, he never 
received a degree. Upon his departure from the University 
he became a minister in Honey Lane, London, probably at 
All Hallows ' Church. His Puritanism soon became evident, 
for in June, 1571, he was summoned before Archbishop 
Parker along with many other prominent Puritans,^^ and 
was informed that he ' ' must come up to the Queen 's injunc- 
tions or be deprived".*'® The next year appeared the 

'^ Thomas Sampson was a leading Puritan non-conformist, but 
took no part in the ecclesiastical disputes after 1572-3, "when he 
was struck with the dead palsy" (cf. Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 44). 

" Ibid., p. 361. 

«^ Foster, Alumni Oxonienses (1500-1714), TV, p. 1630, 

'"^ Of these Goodman, Lever, Sampson, Wyburn, Bering, Field, 
Browne, and Johnson were the best known. 

"' MSS. quoted by Neal, I, p. 119. 



200 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

famous Admonition to the Parliament, setting forth the 
objections of the Puritans to the Anglican Church. This 
book was composed chiefly by Wilcox and John Field,*'^ 
another Puritan divine, a labor in which they probably 
received the assistance of Sampson, Gilby, and Lever,®® 
For presenting this to the Parliament some time during the 
session of 1572 (May 8-June 30), Field and Wilcox were 
sent to prison on July 7, 1572.^" While they remained in 
confinement, "Archbishop Parker sent his chaplain, one 
Pearson, to confer with them".'^" As this conference 
proved unsatisfactory, they were sentenced to one year's 
imprisonment on October 2. These proceedings against 
them, however, served only to increase their fame. While 
they lay in prison, many of their friends visited them.'^^ 
Sandys, Bishop of London, writing to Burghley and Lei- 
cester on August 5, 1573, described the estimation in which 
they were held : ' ' The City will never be quiet, until these 
authors of sedition, who are now esteemed as gods, as 
Field, Wilcox, Cartwright,^- and others, be far removed. 
. . . The people resort unto them, as in Popery they were 
wont to run on pilgrimage. If these idols, who are hon- 
oured for saints, and greatly enriched with gifts, were re- 
moved from hence, their honour would fall into dust."'^^ 
The first Admonition, which had been allowed to pro- 
ceed from the press, went through four editions ''within 
the compass of two years, notwithstanding all the en- 

" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, pp. 482-3. 

•* Strype, Whitgift, I, p. 55. 

"' Brook, I, p. 319. 

'"Ibid., II, p. 185. 

» Strype, Parker, II, p. 240. 

'^ It must be remembered that Cartwright had already taken up the 
cudgels with his Second Admonition to the Parliament (1573) and 
with his Beply to Whitgift 's Answer. 
--^'^ Strype, Whitgift, III, p. 33. 



THOMALIN 201 

deavours of the bishops to find out the press "J* Their 
fame also increased through their drawing up of a Co7i- 
fession of Faith in December, 1572, in which they sup- 
plemented the previous objections which they had made 
against the Anglican Church.'^^ 

Although Wilcox had obtained his release by the fall of 
1573,'^ he lost his preferment in Honey Lane." During the 
next ten years he seems to have remained near London, 
preaching frequently at Bovington in Hertfordshire. One 
letter from his pen is dated from Coventry, December 
21, 1573, and another from Coleman Street, London, six 
weeks later.'^^ Anthony Gilby's View of Antichrist was 
published in 1576, and must have been composed as early 
as 1575 owing to the references to Archbishop Parker, who 
died on May 17 of that year. To this work Wilcox con- 
tributed one section.''^ The most important incident in his 
life, however, so far as the present connection is concerned, 
is that he was cited before Aylmer some time in 1577 along 
with Field and others.^" The bishop informed Burghley 
that he was obstinate, and that he entertained no hopes 
of his conformity; he therefore advised that he "might be 
profitably employed" in one of the northern counties, where 
the Popish religion still retained a strong hold over the 
people, and where he could be set on to the Catholics. The 
bishop offered this unusual counsel because of the oppo- 
sition which he had experienced from these men. 

'* Neal, I, p. 121. 

" Ibid., p. 122. 

^' The date of his release is uncertain; cf. the order in Acts of the 
Privy Council (p. 93) under March 30, 1573, which, if carried out, 
would have set him free from Newgate at that time. 

" Brook, II, p. 191. 

™ Ibid., p. 192. 

'" Strype, Annals, II, pt. 2, p. 218. 

*" Strype, Aylmer, p. 36. 



202 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Now the points which I wish to emphasize are that Wil- 
cox, on account of his position as a leader of the Puritans 
in London, and on account of his persecution by Aylmer in 
1577, a fact which dovetails with the supposed date of this 
eclogue, dealing as it does with events of that year,*^ is 
exactly the sort of man whom Spenser would have chosen 
to introduce into this part of his work. Even if he had 
been personally unacquainted with Wilcox, he must have 
known a great deal about him from the reports circulating 
in Cambridge of the celebrated Admonition. Thomalin, 
according to Spenser's methods of allegory, may refer to 
Thomas somebody, and of the three most prominent Puri- 
tans of the time who bore this surname, two are excluded 
on reasonable grounds, while the character and known inci- 
dents in the life of the third arrest attention. If I were to 
push the argument further, I might say that the contro- 
versial language and arguments which Wilcox has left 
behind him find a parallel in the general tone of Thomalin 's 
remarks in the July eclogue. Here, Thomalin is attacking 
the "proude and ambitious Pastours", the "Popes and 
Cardinalles" of the Anglican Church who 

" lord it as they list :" 

(1. 176) 

One of the theses of Field and Wilcox was that "no names 
can be more blasphemous than those of 'lord-bishops' and 
'archbishops' ".^^ Quotations from the Admonition^^ upon 
this text will also be found in my discussion of Spen- 
ser's ecclesiastical satire. From another work of theirs, 
however, I can give a similar citation : " we hold that there 

" In March Aylmer had become Bishop of London, and in June 
Grindal had been sequestrated. 

*=Book II, p. 190. 

^ One section of this work is devoted to ' ' the corruptions of the 
(Anglican) hierarchy, and the tyrannical proceedings of the bishops". 



ROSALIND 203 

ought to be joined to the pastors of the Church, elders and 
deacons, for the bridling of vices and the providing of the 
poor ; that no pastor ought to usurp dominion over another, 
nor any church exercise lordship or rule over another".^* 
The lordship and pomp of the bishops never failed to pro- 
voke Puritan attacks. 

For all these reasons, therefore, I believe that Thomas 
Wilcox may very possibly have been intended for the 
Thomalin of the July eclogue, a man whom Spenser might 
easily have met in London, after his departure from Cam- 
bridge. The defence of Grindal by such a thorough-going 
Puritan as Wilcox would not be surprising, for the Puri- 
tans considered him their champion after his disgrace, 
while the Thomalin-Morrell quarrel offers a striking parallel 
to the known relations between Aylmer and Wilcox. 

iii. Rosalind 

The story of Rosalind is probably that part of the Shep- 
herd's Calender which most naturally arises in the remem- 
brance of the majority of its readers. The identity of this 
person was so carefully concealed by Spenser and his 
friends that no satisfactory clue has ever come to light, and 
the guesses of would-be discoverers have been either con- 
troverted or else believed by few. In a work of this kind 
on the Shepherd's Calender, however, it will be necessary 
to review the more important of these theories, to test 
their probability, and, after a consideration of all the 
evidence, to determine what — if any — view of the identity 
of this elusive individual is at the present day plausible. 
In order to carry out this plan, however, it will first be 
advisable to collect the references of the poet and his 
friends to this lady, which must always form the basis of 
any inquiry like the present one. 

^ The Confession of Faith, quoted by Neal, I, p, 122, 



204 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

The following references in the Calender are found in 
which the name Rosalind appears, including passages both 
in the text and in the gloss : 

" In this fyrst iEglogue Colin Cloute, a shepheardes boy, com- 
plaineth him of his unfortunate love, being but newly (as semeth) 
enamoured of a countrie lasse called Rosalinde" (January 
" argument "). 

" * A thousand sithes I curse that carefuU hower 
Wherein I longd the neighbour towne to see, 
And eke tenne thousand sithes I blesse the stoure 
Wherein I sawe so fayre a sight as shee: 
Yet all for naught: such sight hath bred my bane. 
Ah, God ! that love should breede both joy and payne ! 

* It is not Hobbinol wherefore I plaine, 
Albee my love he seeke with dayly suit; 
His clownish gifts and curtsies I disdaine. 
His kiddes, his cracknelles, and his early fruit. 
Ah, foolish Hobbinol ! thy gyf ts bene vayne ; 
Colin them gives to Rosalind againe. 

*I love thilke lasse, (alas! why doe I love?) 
And am forlorne, (alas! why am I lorne?) 
Shee deignes not my good will, but doth reprove, 
And of my rurall musicke holdeth scome. 
Shepheards devise she hateth as the snake, 
And laughes the songs that Colin Clout doth make.' " 
(Complaint of Colin in the January eclogue) 

"Rosalinde, is also a feigned name, which, being wel ordered, 
wil bewray the very name of hys love and mistresse, whom by 
that name he coloureth. So as Ovide shadoweth hys love under 
the name of Corynna, which of some is supposed to be Julia, 
themperor Augustus his daughter, and wyfe to Agryppa. So 
doth Aruntius Stella every where call his Lady Asteris and 
lanthis, albe it is wel knowen that her right name was Violantilla : 
as witnesseth Statins in his Epithalamium. And so the famous 



ROSALIND 205 

Paragone of Italy, Madonna Coelia, in lier letters envelopeth her 
selfe under the name of Zima: and Petrona under the name of 
Belloehia. And this generally hath bene a common custome of 
counterfeicting the names of secret Personages." (January 
gloss) 

'* Colin thou kenst, the Southerne shepheardes boye ; 
Him Love hath wounded with a deadly darte: 
Whilome on him was all my care and joye, 
Forcing with gyfts to winne his wanton heart. 
But now from me hys madding mynd is starte, 
And woes the Widdowes daughter of the glenne; 
So nowe fayre Rosalind hath bredde hys smart, 
So now his frend is chaunged for a frenne." 

(Hobbinol in the April eclogue) 

'' The Widowcs, He calleth Rosalind the Widowes daughter of 
the glenne, that is, of a country Hamlet or borough, which I 
thinke is rather sayde to colour and eoncele the person, then 
simply spoken. For it is well knowen, even in spighte of Colin 
and Hobbinoll, that shee is a Gentlewoman of no meane house, 
nor endewed with anye vulgare and common gifts, both of nature 
and mannei's : but suche indeed, as neede nether Colin be ashamed 
to have her made known by his verse, nor Hobbinol be greved, 
that so she should be commended to immortalitie for her rare and 
singular vertues: Specially deserving it no lesse, then eyther 
Myrto the most excellent Poete Theocritus his dearling, or Lau- 
retta the divine Petrarches Goddesse, or Himera the worthye 
Poete Stersichorus hys idol; upon whom he is sayd so much to 
have doted, that, in regard of her exeelleneie, he scorned and 
wrote against the beauty of Helena." (April gloss) 

" This ^glogue is wholly vowed to the complayning of Colins 
ill successe in his love. For being (as is aforesaid) enamoured 
of a country lasse, Rosalind, and having (as seemeth) founde 
place in her heart, he lamenteth to his deare frend Hobbinoll, that 
he is nowe forsaken unfaithfully, and in his steede Menalcas, 
another shepheard, received disloyally," (June " argument ") 



206 spensee's shepherd's calender 

" The couth I sing of love, and tune my pype 
Unto my plaintive pleas in verses made: 
Tho would I seeke for Queene-apples unrype, 
To give my Rosalind; and in Sommer shade 
Dight gaudy Girlonds was my common trade, 
To crowne her golden locks: but yeeres more rype, 
And losse of her, whose love as lyfe I wayd. 
Those weaiy wanton toyes away dyd wype." 

(Complaint of Colin in the June eclogue, 11. 41-8) 

" Then should my plaints, causd of discurtesee. 
As messengers of this my painfull plight, 
Flye to my love, where ever that she bee, 
And pierce her heart with poynt of worthy wight, 
As shee deserves that wrought so deadly spight. 
And thou, Menalcas, that by trecheree 
Didst underfong my lasse to wexe so light, 
Shouldest well be knowne for such thy villanee." 

(Ibid., 11. 97-104) 

" Ye gentle Shepheards ...... 

Beare witnesse all of thys so wicked deede: 
And tell the lasse, whose flowi'e is woxe a weede, 
And f aultlesse fayth is turned to faithlesse fere. 
That she the truest shepheards hart made bleede. 
That lyves on earth, and loved her most dere." 

{Ibid., 11. 106-12) 

" Ah, faithlesse Rosalind and voide of grace, 
That are the roote of all this ruthf ull woe ! " 

(Answer of Hobbinol, ibid., 11. 115-6) 

" Discurtesie : he meaneth the f alsenesse of his lover Rosalinde, 
who forsaking hym hadde chosen another" (June gloss). 

"Menalcas, the name of a shephearde in Virgile; but here is 
meant a person unknowne and secrete, against whome he often 
bitterly invayeth" (Ibid.). 

" The great shepheard, is some man, etc. The person both of 
the shephearde and of Dido is unknowen, and closely buried in 



ROSALIND 207 

the Authors eonceipt. But out of doubt I am, that it is not 
Rosalind, as some imagin : for he speaketh soon after of her also." 
(November gloss) 

" And, if thy rymes as rownde and ruf ull bene 
As those that did thy Rosalind eomplayne," etc. 

(Thenot to Colin in the November eclogue, 11. 43-4) 

" ' Adieu, delightes, that lulled me asleepe ; 
Adieu, my deare, whose love I bought so deare; 
Adieu, my little Lambes and loved sheepe; 
Adieu, ye Woodes, that oft my witnesse were: 
Adieu, good Hobbinoll, that was so true. 
Tell Rosalind, her Colin bids her adieu.' " 

(December eclogue, 11. 151-6) 

" Adiew delights, is a conclusion of all : where in sixe verses he 
comprehendeth briefly all that was touched in this booke. In the 
first verse his delights of youth generally : In the second, the love 
of Rosalind: In the thyrd, the keeping of sheepe, which is the 
argument of all the ^glogues: In the fourth, his complaints: 
And in the last two, his professed friendship and good will to his 
good friend Hobbinoll." ^ 

The only other passage in Spenser's poetry in which 
reference is made to Rosalind by name is the description 
at the end of Colin Clout's Come Home Again (dated 
December 27, 1591),- which is too long to quote here.^ In 
the conventional language of courtly love the poet affirms 
the continuance of his love for ' ' that f aire Mayd ' '. 

With the foregoing, three other allusions may be joined, 
two of which undoubtedly glance at Rosalind, though leav- 
ing her name unmentioned : 

^ The conventional August sestina is also connected with her (cf. 
eel. viii, 11. 139-42). 

=■ LI. 897-953. 

' Grosart includes passages from the August eclogue, from the 
Hymne in Honour of Love, and from the Hymne in Honour of 
Beautie in his collection of Spenser's references to Eosalind. The 
first of these certainly does not refer to Eosalind, and the connection of 
the other two is speculative. 



208 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" Now, as touching the generall dry ft and purpose of his 
^glogues, I mind not to say much, him selfe labouring to con- 
ceale it. Onely this appeareth, that his unstayed yougth had 
long wandred in the common Labyrinth of Love, in which time to 
mitigate and allay the heate of his passion ... he compiled 
these xij ^glogues," etc. (The Epistle of E.K.) 

"Then also, me seemeth, the work (the Calender) to base 
for his excellent Lordship, being made in Honour of a priuate 
Personage unknowne, which of some yl-willers might be upbraided, 
not to be so worthie, as you knowe she is" (Letter of Spenser 
to Harvey, Oct. 5 [16], 1579). 

" Thinke uppon Petrarches 

Arbor vittoriosa, triomfale 
Onor d'Imperadori, e di Poete: 

and perhappes it will aduanee the wynges of your Imagination a 
degree higher: at the least if any thing can be added to the 
loftinesse of his coneeite, wh5 gentle Mistresse Rosalinde, once 
reported to haue all the Intelligences at commaundement, and an 
other time. Christened her, Segnior Pegaso." (Letter of Harvey 
to Spenser, May 9, 1580). 

The postscript of this last letter contains a joking 
reference to an altera Bosalindula at whom the poet had 
previously hinted in his letter of April 13, 1580.* This, 
however, does not designate Rosalind herself. 

From these references various guesses (for they can 
never be anything more) have been hazarded concerning 
the identity of Rosalind. The January gloss, in which E. 
K. remarks that Rosalind " is also a feigned name, which, 
being wel ordered, wil bewray the very name of hys love 
and mistresse", has afforded a convenient starting point, 
and the expression ''wel ordered" has been generally ac- 
cepted as indicating an anagram. 

* Spenser refers to her as Meum Corculum; Harvey in his reply 
gives her the name noted in the text. 



ROSALIND 209 

The first theory of which a record remains did not 
attempt to give Rosalind's real name ; it merely asserted her 
relationship to certain people. John Aubrey, writing 
towards the latter part of the seventeenth century, stated 
on the alleged authority of John Dryden, the poet, that 
Spenser "was an acquaintance and frequenter of Sir 
Erasmus Dreyden"^ and that "his mistress, Rosalind, was 
a kinswoman of Sir Erasmus's Lady".** The placing of 
Rosalind by the poet Drayton in the Cotswold hills,^ which 
will be discussed more fully later, has been cited in con- 
nection with this story.^ Unfortunately for this view the 
testimony is of a very flimsy nature. It is improbable, on 
the one hand, that Drayton's meaning is that Rosalind 
was a native of the Cotswold hills, while, on the other, 
Aubrey is never a very reliable authority. Among the 
latter 's notes on Spenser he gives the disproved story of 
the contest with Launcelot Andrews over a fellowship, 
repeats a piece of gossip from his contemporary, Woodford, 
to the effect that Spenser "lived sometime" in Hampshire 
or Wiltshire and that he "writt good part of his verses" 
there, and accepts the year 1510 as the date of his birth. 
Elsewhere he is generally incorrect in his biographical 
notes, his remarks on Shakespeare being a fair sample of 
his accuracy. The lead which Aubrey has given, moreover, 
has never led anywhere, for little information concerning 
the Wilkes family of Hodnell has yet come to light.® 

The next guess occurred in the Life of Spenser prefixed 
to Ralph Church's edition of the Faerie Queene. After 
indicating that Spenser's family may have resided in 

' The grandfather of the poet, created a baronet November 16, 1619. 
' Lives of Eminent Men, 11, p. 541. 
^Eclogue nine, 2nd ed. of Shepherd's Garland (1606). 
' Professor J. B. Fletcher, article on Spenser in Encyclopedia 
Americana. 

* Lady Dryden belonged to this family. 

15 



210 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Northamptonshire, the writer ventured to add: "that as 
Rose is a common Christian name, so in Ke^it among the 
Gentry under Henry VI, in Fuller's Worthies, we find at 
Canterbury the name of John Lynde ' '.^^ No record of a 
Kose or Rosa Lynde contemporaneous with Spenser has 
ever been discovered. The famous Shakespearean scholar, 
Edmond Malone, evolved the anagram into Elisa Horden, 
remarking in reference to Church that "Thomas Horden, 
as well as Mr. Linde, was a gentleman of Kent, in the time 
of Henry the Sixth ".^^ Evidently, however, he gave little 
credence either to Church's or his own solution.^- 

In 1850 the Rev. N. J. Halpin of Dublin propounded the 
first scientific guess of Rosalind 's identity, which through a 
series of misfortunes was not published in full until 1858 
in the November number of the Atlantic Monthly (Vol. II, 
pp. 674-88).^^ Considering Rosalind, or Rosalinde as it 
sometimes occurs in the gloss, as an anagram, he evolved 
the name Rose Daniel, and attempted to prove her existence 
by identifying her with the Rose to whom John Florio, the 
eccentric Italian scholar, was married, and whom he has 
mentioned in his will. On the strength of Daniel's com- 
mendatory verses to the second edition of Florio 's World 
of Words (1611) and to the second edition of his transla- 
tion of Montaigne's Essays (1613), in which he salutes 
Florio as his ' ' deare friend and brother ' ' and as his ' ' deare 
brother and friend" respectively, Halpin conjectured that 
Florio had married Daniel's sister. In his will Florio 
speaks of his wife Rose, formerly, according to this theory, 

" TTte Faerie Queene, edited by Ealph Church (1758), I, p. xx. 

" Malone, The Life of Shakespeare, p. 218, in Vol. II of his edition. 

''Ibid., p. 219. 

"By his son, Major C. G. Halpin. The ire of Grosart, who has 
undermined this theory, was aroused because E. P. Whipple in The 
Literature of the Age of Elisabeth (ed. 1886, p. 194) spoke of this 
as an American solution of the problem (III, p. Ixxxvii). 



EOSALIND 211 

Eose Daniel.^* Various reasons were advanced to supple- 
ment this view, the chief of which was that Florio often 
used the appellation of "the Resolute", an adjective ex- 
pressed in Greek by the words fj-evos and dLU?/, which 
combine to form Menalcas, the name of Colin Clout's suc- 
cessful rival.^^ Grosart combatted this theory with the dis- 
covery that the surname of Florio 's wife Rose, whom he 
married at St. James's Clerkenwell, London, on September 
9, 1617, was Spicer, and with the affirmation that "his 
notorious signature of 'the Resolute' occurs in none of his 
books until 1598, a good nineteen years after the publica- 
tion of the Shepheards Calender''\^^ Halpin's theory is 
probably groundless, but not for the reasons which Grosart 
has advanced. Owing to the varying orthography of the 
time it is possible that Spencer or Spenser may have been 
the name of the lady whom Florio married. I have found 
one example at this time where Spicer has been faultily 
read for Spenser.^^ Both names w^ere then common, the 
latter more so than the former, and it is easy to see how a 
confusion might have arisen. Spenser was often written 
Specer (the poet himself signed his name Speser), and it 
would be an easy matter to confuse this 'e' with a mark 
of omission above it for a dotted 4'. At least we have one 
example where this mistake occurred in Spenser's time. 
On the other hand, Grosart 's remark that Florio 's "signa- 
ture of the 'Resolute' occurs in none of his books until 
1598" can neither be proved nor disproved. Of his four 

"F. J, Child (1866) did not discuss this view at length, but agreed 
to it in a foreword, stating that he had not read it until his edition 
of Spenser was in the press. Lowell (1875) said that Halpin "makes 
it extremely probable that Kosalinde is the anagram of Eose Daniel, 
sister of the poet and married to John Florio" {Essays, IV, p. 285). 

" Cf. Grosart, III, p. xcviii. 

^"lUd., p. ci. P. W. Long follows Grosart {Anglia, XXXI, p. 80). 

" Macray, Annals of the Bodleian, p. 92. 



212 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

works which appeared before 1598 two, the First Fruites 
(1578) and a translation of Ramuzio's Voyages (1580), 
were contemporary with the Shepherd's Calender. Of the 
former only one imperfect copy^^ (in the British Museum) 
is known to exist ; of the latter none exists. Grosart did not 
say that he had examined the one remaining copy of either 
of these works, and it is therefore impossible to tell whether 
Florio therein signed himself "the Resolute". Halpin's 
theory cannot be controverted by the reasons which Grosart 
has expounded. 

The true grounds on which to reject Halpin's theory, 
however, are that the date of Florio 's marriage with Rose 
Spicer or Spencer (1617) precludes the possibility that she 
could have been Spenser's wife or beloved forty years 
before, with Florio as the favored rival. On the other hand, 
no Rose Daniel is known to have existed. Neither of the 
poet's sisters was named Rose, while Sidney Lee" and others 
have taken Daniel's references to his "brother" Florio to 
mean nothing more than that they were associated as fellow 
gentlemen-pensioners of Queen Anne's privy chamber dur- 
ing a period of time which included the years 1611 and 
1613. Of Florio 's wife Rose I have been unable to obtain 
any new information. What is known of her is limited 
to the entry of her marriage and to Florio 's mention of her 
in his will. Neither can I discover any other Rose Spicer 
or Spencer who lived at this time, although it is not im- 
probable, owing to the commonness of both these names, 
that such a person existed. Halpin's interesting theory 
must therefore be relegated to the lumber-room of literary 
curiosities. 

" I presume that this, like most imperfect copies, is lacking in the 
title and dedicatory pages at least. If so, this removes all possibility 
of knowing how Florio signed himself in 1578. 

^'Articles on Daniel and Florio in Diet. Nat. Biog.; also P. W. 
Long, op. cit., p. 80. Grosart mentioned the same doubt, but did not 
depend upon it for his theses. 



ROSALIND 213 

Mr. F. 6. Fleay, in his Guide to Chancer and Spenser,-° 
evolved Rosalind into Rose Dinle or Dinley, and identified 
her, on the strength of Drayton's reference,*^ with the 
family of Dinleies who lived at Charlton in Worcestershire, 
a few miles from Evesham. The passage in question occurs 
in Drayton's ninth eclogue which appeared for the first 
time in the second edition of his pastorals (1606). The 
poet is describing a bevy of celebrated nymphs or shep- 
herdesses : 

" Here might you many a shepherdesse have seene, 
Of which no place as * Cotswold ' such doth yeeld, 
Some of it native, some for love I ween, 
Thether were come from many a fertill field. 

There was the widows daughter of the * Glen ', 
Deare ' Rosalynd ', that scarsely brook'd compare, 
The * Moreland ' mayden, so admyr'd of men, 
Bright ' Gouldy-locks ', and ' Phillida ' the f ayre. 

' Lettice ' and ' Parnell ' prety lovely peats, 

' Cusse ' of the Fould, the Virgine of the well 

Fayre ' Ambrie ' with the alablaster teats. 

And more whose names were heere to long to tell."^^ 

On the ground that the natives are mentioned first Fleay 
remarks that "Rosalynde is probably one of them". " In 
this case," he proceeds, "the glen must be the Vale of 
Evesham, and in that vale we must look for her family." 
The authority of Camden, who ''mentions only one family 
in this vale, that of the Dinleies of Charleton", he used as 
the final means of identification. To destroy this theory 
Grosart was more than usually inaccurate.-^ After minor 

"Published in 1877; the reference is to p. 81. 
""■ Cf. supra, p. 209. 

"Foemes Lyrich and Pastoral (Spenser Society Publications, 1891), 
pp. 91-92. 

^ He used his favorite localization of Eosalind in ' ' the North ' ', 



214 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

blunders, he stated that "Camden mentions no Dinleis of 
Charleton or anywhere else contemporary with Spenser in 
1579".^* It is true that Camden does not say that such and 
such members of the Dinley family were alive in 1579, but 
merely intimates^^ that they had been living at Charlton 
for some years before he wrote (1586). The pedigree of the 
Charlton Dyneleys (as the name is generally spelled), how- 
ever, is at hand, and proves conclusively that many mem- 
bers of this family were living at Charlton circ. 1579.-^ 
This family first came into possession of the estate at Charl- 
ton in the time of Edward III, and held it continuously 
until 1682.^'^ On the other hand, it is probable from Dray- 
ton 's list that ' ' Lettice ", " Parnell ", " Cusse of the Fould ' ', 
and "fayre Ambrie", whose names are thoroughly rustic, 
are the "natives", and that Rosalind, "the Moreland 
may den", and the others "were come" to Cotswold "for 
love ' '. As P. W. Long remarks, ' ' the preeminence of Rosa- 
lind 's poetic fame will account for her precedence" (p. 
81).-^ On one point, however, Grosart was right: "no 
'Rose' Dinlei appears in any of the Charleton Dinleis' pedi- 
grees" (p. civ). 

and took ' ' the ' Moreland ' mayden ' ' to apply to the lady as an in- 
habitant of the moors in the Pendle district. ' ' The ' Moreland ' may- 
den ' ', however, is almost certainly another shepherdess, and not a mere 
appellation for Eosalind. Fleay and Grosart both took the literal 
meaning of "glenne", forgetting, as Mr. Long pointed out, that E. K. 
was interpreting the allegorical meaning of this word, which there ia 
no reason to suppose that he misunderstood. For a convenient dis- 
cussion on "glenne", see Professor J. B. Fletcher, Mod. Lang. Notes 
(1907), XXII, p. 63. 

^ Ibid., p. civ. 

-' Britannia, II, p. 472. 

^ The Visitation of Worcestershire, 1569 (Rarl. Soc. Publ.), p. 50. 

" H. S. Grazebrook, The Heraldry of Worcestershire (1873), I, pp. 
182-4. 

^ Op, cit. 



ROSALIND 215 

Grosart (III, p. cvi) resolved Rosalind into Rose Dine- 
ley, and attempted to connect her with the Dineleys of 
Downham, Lancashire, who lived in the Pendle district. 
When he came to write his Life of Spenser, he modi- 
fied his first assertion : ' ' The more I have studied the prob- 
lem, the more I am satisfied that in a yet untraced Rose or 
Elisa or Alice Dineley or Dynley or Dinlei, and an Aspinall 
(Menalcas) of these 'North partes', we shall find . . . the 
'parties' ... of this love-story" (I, p. 50). In other 
words, Grosart found no actual original for Rosalind. 
With him also the lady whose name he evolved from the 
conjectured anagram continued to be imaginary. 

The untrustworthiness of this theory, which has gained a 
wide acceptance-^ on account of the eminence of its advo- 
cate, received a scientific criticism at the hands of Mr. P. 
W. Long, writing in 1907.^*^ Grosart 's theory rests entirely 
on the localization of Spenser's residence in north-east 
Lancashire after his departure from the University. In 
the first place, he made the mistake of misinterpreting a 
passage in one of Harvey's letters to Spenser, where the 
former was speaking of certain English poems of his which 
he charged the poet with surreptitiously printing : "to be 
shorte, I would to God that all the ilfavorid copyes of my 
nowe prostituted devises were buried a greate deale deeper 
in the centre of the erthe then the height and altitude of the 
middle region of the verye English Alpes amountes unto in 

"Mr. J. W. Hales, in his revised life of the poet (1896) prefixed 
to the Globe edition of 1906, and Mr. Sidney L. Lee, in the article 
on Spenser in the Diet. Nat. Biog., from their position in the world 
of letters and scholarship sufficiently attest the credence which Gro- 
sart 's theory has obtained, through their own acceptance of it. 

*" Mr. Long 's article, Spenser 's Eosalind : In honour of a private 
personage unknoivne appeared in Anglia (1908), XXXI (n. f. XIX), 
pp. 72-104. 



216 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

the aier ' '.^^ The last two words Grosart read ' ' your shier ' ', 
and connected this district of the "English Alpes" with 
Pendle and north-east Lancashire. Long demonstrated 
that Grosart misread these words: "the antithesis, deeper 
. . . centre . . . erthe . . . height . . . altitude . . . middle 
. . . aier, would be destroyed by the reading shier^'.^^ 

Grosart 's attempt to localize the Spensers, who spelled 
their name with an 's', not a 'c', in north-east Lancashire, 
and his lengthy assertions that the Calender reflects the 
dialect and the scenery of the same district, received refu- 
tation from Long, and have been discussed by me in another 
place.^^ In spite of the amount of labor which Grosart 
expended to prove Spenser's connection with that part of 
England, the basis of his theory and his methods of reason- 
ing were erroneous, and his identification of Eosalind with 
an imaginary Rose Dinley is therefore entirely without 
foundation. 

The latest theory, and by all odds the most interesting 
and the most worthy of belief, is that recently offered by 
Mr. P. W. Long, to whose work I have had occasion to 
refer more than once in the pages above. It is contained in 
the last ten pages of his article (pp. 94-104),^* and it identi- 
fies Rosalind with a certain Elizabeth North,^^ the daughter 
of Sir Thomas North,^** the translator of Plutarch, and the 

^^ In Grosart 's Worlcs of Harvey this occurs in I, p. 119; the refer- 
ence in the Camden Society's edition of Harvey's Letter-Book, ed. by 
E. J. Long Scott, is the 2nd series, XXXIII (1884), p. xi. 

^^ Long, ibid., p. 83. 

^^ Cf. the section in this chapter entitled The Biography of Spenser 
(1576-1580), pp. 289-95. 

«In Anglia (1908), XXXI (n. f. XIX), pp. 72-104. 

^^ Following the hint given by Mr. J. W. Hales in Folia Litteraria 
(1893), p. 160, and accepting "Kosalinde" as "the uniform spell- 
ing", he resolved the name into Elisa North, changing 'd' to 'th' in 
accordance with the euphonic alterations allowed by the rules of the 
Elizabethan anagram. 

«' Knighted in 1591 (D.N.B.). 



ROSALIND 217 

niece of Roger, Baron North of Kirtling in Cambridgeshire. 
As opposed to all previous theories his original for Rosa- 
lind actually existed,^^ and in this respect he claims a 
greater amount of attention than previous speculators. As 
far as I am concerned, however, and much as I should like 
to connect Spenser with Lord North in some personal rela- 
tionship, I find it difficult to accept this new elucidation. 
Its contents, however, require pretty full consideration. 

At the outset it is necessary to point out that Long's 
theory is based upon the Cambridgeshire setting of the 
poem, — that is, he believes the various references in the 
text and the gloss refer to Cambridge and its neighborhood. 
With this view, as appears elsewhere, I most heartily agree. 
A critical analysis of the contents of the text and gloss of 
the Calender has led me to believe that a great part of the 
eclogues were either composed in Cambridge or else were 
intended to refer to persons and events contemporaneous 
with Spenser's connection with the University .^^ From 
this starting point. Long proceeds to interpret the poetry 
of Spenser and the glosses of E, K. at their face value,^^ 
and endeavors to show that the ''circumstances" of Eliza- 
beth North "fit the allusions relative to Rosalind" (p. 95). 

Passing over his remarks on Elizabeth North's station in 
life and her presence in the vicinity of Cambridge (pp. 
95-6), — i. e. that she was "a countrie lasse" (Jan. arg.) 
living in a "neighbour towne" (Jan. eel. 1. 50), "a Gentle- 
woman of no meane house" (Apr. gloss, 1. 26), and "a 
private personage unknowne" (Spenser's letter to Harvey, 
5 [16] Oct., 1579), all of which fit the case of Miss North,— 
I come to his discussion of the ' ' Widdowes daughter of the 

" Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 350. 

^ Cf. the previous chapter, passim. 

" Since Long has made use of these methods of literal interpreta- 
tion, his theory should be tested by similar explanations of the text 
and gloss of the poem. 



218 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

glenne" passage (Apr. eel. and gloss). The comment of 
E. K. reads as follows: ^'The Widowes, He calleth Rosalind 
the Widowes daughter of the glenne, that is, of a country- 
Hamlet or borough, which I thinke is rather sayde to 
coloure and concele the person, then simply spoken." As- 
suming that Thomas North was a widower in 1579, Long 
on the strength of two examples reads "Widdowes" into 
" widower 's ".*** Etymologically speaking, no obstacles 
existed to prevent this use of widow for widower; practi- 
cally, this signification would seem to have been rare, for, 
although the word widower constantly appears in the 
Church registers of this period, scarcely a trace is left of 
ividow as its variant.'*^ 

At the same time, it is uncertain whether Thomas North 
was actually a widower circa 1579. His first wife, who was 
the mother of Elizabeth, was alive at the end of the year 
1577, according to an entry of Lord North's under Nov. 
26 : "A Litter to convey my Sister North to London. . . . 
37s. 9d." (Long).'*^ As Lord North's only surviving sister 
was married at this time, and as he had no brother save 
Thomas, the reference must have been to the latter 's wife.*^ 
Long has inferred that another entry under date of Nov. 6, 
1578, — "paid the Mr. of the Rolls a Cli which my brother 
tooke upp of his Childrens Portion",** — refers to the dis- 

*" They are taken from the Wells Eegister under the year 1552 
("John Taylor, wyddowe"), and from a remark on St. Paul by Law- 
rence Tomson in 1579, contained in Calvin 's Sermons on Timothy, 
etc., 257/2. The E.D.D. gives widow for widower also. 

^'A search through the Church registers published by the Harleian 
Society has failed to reveal to me the use of widow for widower. For 
frequent examples of widower itself, cf. Vol. I (The Begisters of 
St. Peter's Cornhill), pp. 231-8. 

^' ArcMeologia, XIX, p. 297; in this place will be found extracts 
from The Boolce of howshold charges, etc., of Lord North (1575/6- 
82), of which Long has made considerable use. 

"Article on Edward, Lord North, in Diet. Nat. Biog. 

** Archaeologia, ibid. 



ROSALIND 219 

posal of Mrs, North's property after her decease (p. 97). 
Unfortunately, this memorandum jotted down by Lord 
North is susceptible of other interpretations, which, from our 
knowledge of the various members of the North family, are 
more likely to be true. In the first place, it is clear that 
the payment passed through the hands of the Master of 
the Rolls, an official who then occupied a position in Chan- 
cery second only to that of the Lord Chancellor,*^ and who 
was invested with the power of giving judgment in all suits 
which appertained to the jurisdiction of this court. That 
matters relating to inheritance and to the settlement of 
estates then passed through his hands, we know from histor- 
ical records.*® 

In so far, therefore, Long's assumption that the entry of 
Lord North refers to "the disposal of . . . property" is 
sound; but why should the allusion be to the will of Mrs. 
Thomas North? "What reason is there to suppose that the 
poor wife of a poor man*^ died possessed of as large a sum 
as £100?*^ Even if this had been true, why should Lord 
North, rather than her own husband who was a lawyer, 
attend to the management of her estate? These are ques- 
tions which Long should have explained. The allusion of 
Lord North may be, for instance, to a provision in the wills 
either of his father,*^ mother, or step-mother,^° who were 

*' Art. Master of the Bolls, Encycl. Brit. 

*^Cal. Hatf. MSS., i, p. 473; ii, pp. 58, 287. 

" Leicester, writing to Burghley on August 21, 1580, asked the 
latter 's patronage for Thomas North, "in his book he has to pass. He 
is a very honest gentleman and hath many good things in him which 
are drowned only by poverty" (Cal. Hatf. MSS., ii, p. 339). 

*^ Equivalent to about £1000 ($5000) at the present day. 

*' Edward, Lord North, died on December 31, 1564, and was there- 
fore alive when the children of his son Thomas were born, for Eliza- 
beth, who married in 1579, was younger than her brother, Edward. 

" The first wife of Edward, Lord North, was the mother of his four 
children, and his second wife survived him until June 2, 1575. Each 



220 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

certainly able to have bequeathed the sum of £100 to the 
children of Thomas North. Lord North, as executor, would 
then have paid the bequest to his brother through the regu- 
lar channel of the Master of the Rolls. Presumably, young 
Edward North, who had been a member of the Earl of 
Bedford's household for at least one year and a half pre- 
vious to the date of the entry ,^^ had attained that age named 
in the will when he and his sister were to receive their 
"portion". Lord North's memorandum might therefore 
simply refer to the fact that his brother had actually ob- 
tained this bequest which had been willed to his children. 
At any rate, this appears to me a rather more logical expla- 
nation of the transaction noted by Lord North than the one 
which Long has casually offered. 

From another point of view, assuming that Mrs. North 
died circa 1578, it is curious that Lord North, who made 
generous presents to the members of his brother's family, 
as his Booke attests, has failed to record from January, 
1575-6, until January, 1581-2, any disbursement for funeral 
expenses, which he would probably have paid, and there- 
fore have recorded, in the case of the death of his brother's 
wife. If Mrs. Thomas North really died at some date be- 
tween Nov. 26, 1577, and Nov. 6, 1578, leaving her husband 
a widower, no record remains of the event.^- Even if we 
accept, therefore, the rather dubious idea that Spenser was 
referring to a man when he wrote Widdowes, Long has 
unfortunately been unable to show that Thomas North was 
a widower in or about 1579 rather than a few years later. 
The date of the latter 's second marriage offers no assistance, 

was wealthy in her own right (cf. D.N.B. and Cooper, Athenae, 
I, pp. 232-3). 

" Archaeologia, XIX, p. 293. 

" Her name does not appear in any of the published registers of 
London, Cambridgeshire, or Hertfordshire churches, through which I 
have searched in the hope of corroborating Mr. Long. 



ROSALIND 221 

for it did not take place until about ten years later at the 
earliest. Dr. Richard Bridgwater, the first husband of 
North's second wife, lived until Feb. 15, 1587-8." 

Other arguments which Long has produced to prove that 
the "circumstances" of Elizabeth North "fit the allusions 
relative to Rosalind" are interesting only if the preceding 
evidence is sound.^* Indeed the same criticism applies to 
the remainder of his remarks, which are concerned with the 
probability "that Spenser had some acquaintance with 
Thomas North", with the surmise that Elizabeth North may 
have actually met Spenser at Leicester House when visiting 
London ' ' with her widowed father for a few months before 
her marriage ",^^ and with the guess that Spenser and 

^ Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 19. 

"These are: (1) that the "North countrye" and similar allusions 
in the June gloss may be graceful compliments to the North family; 
(2) that those "hilles" of the June eclogue (1. 19), "if localized at 
all, may have been the Gogmagog hills", situated a few miles south 
of Cambridge; (3) that "Rosalind's forsaking of Colin" in the June 
eclogue corresponds to the marriage of Elizabeth North to Thomas 
Stuteville of Brinkley in the month of June, 1579; (4) that "with 
Harvey in Cambridge, Eosalind in Brinkley, and Spenser in London" 
Colin 's farwell message (eel. xii) is appropriate. 

^ This visit is based upon the interpretation of 

"(For love then in the Lyons house did dwell)" 

(eel. xii, 1. 57) 

as a reference to Leicester, on account of an inaptness in applying 
it to the events of Colin 's life, "because Leo presides over July, the 
month after Eosalind forsook Colin" (p. 101), and also upon the 
inference that the poet laments her departure in the August sestina: 

' ' I hate the house, since thence my love did part. ' ' 

(1. 161) 

If we knew that Elizabeth North had visited London, then the allu- 
sions noted by Long might be applied with some show of plausibility 
to fit her case. But, as no evidence exists of such a visit, the infer- 
ences are of little value until we can find an established set of inci- 
dents to which they conform. 



222 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Harvey may have resorted to Lord North's seat at Kirt- 
ling during the royal progress (September 1-3, 1578), when 
Elizabeth North may have also been present. These are the 
successive reasons which he has brought forward. In con- 
clusion, it may be repeated that his theory of Rosalind is 
the most interesting one which has ever been offered in 
print, and that it possesses a unique advantage over its 
predecessors in that the existence of its heroine is a fact. 
That we know scarcely anything about her is a matter of 
deep regret. 

There is still another theory, which was first distinctly 
set forth in print by Thomas Keightley.^® This is that Rosa- 
lind was "a purely ideal being" (p. 413). He denied that 
E. K. intended an anagram in the much vexed passage of 
the January gloss (to 1. 60), on the ground that the other 
fictitious names there enumerated, the Corinna (Julia) of 
Ovid, the Asteris or lanthis (Violantilla) of Aruntius 
Stella, Zima (Madonna Ccelia), and Bellochia (Petrona), 
are not anagrams of the names of their originals. He pro- 
ceeded to mention that ^^Rosa linda ... is pure Italian 
and Spanish, signifying beautiful rose^\ The conclusion 
reached was "that she may have been the Muse that in- 
spired the two friends (Spenser and Harvey), that they 
combined to hoax E. K., and that those expressions of 
'gentle Mistress Rosalind'^'' may have occurred in some 
compositions of Harvey's, dictated by the Muse" (p. 413). 
In this light he considered the fareAvell in Colin Clout's 
Come Home Again explicable. 

Keightley's theory, although worthy of consideration in 
itself, was the natural father of an absurdity which ap- 
peared four years later.^* An anonymous writer, who also 

^Fraser's Magazine (Oct., 1859), LX: On the Life of Edmund 
Spenser, pp. 410-22. 

"Harvey, Works (Grosart), I, p. 31. 

°* Article signed "C" in Notes and Queries (3rd s.), IV, pp. 101- 
3, entitled TJie "Faerie Queene" Unveiled. 



ROSALIND 223 

regarded Rosalind as "the poet's pastoral muse", reckoned 
the name an anagram for ' ' Rondelais ' ', i. e. roundelay. He 
made the mistake of saying, however, that Rosalind was 
always the spelling in the poem^^ and that Rosalinde was 
always the spelling in the gloss.^" Thence he proceeded to 
identify this Rosalind with the Elisa of the April eclogue 
("rond-Elisa"), with the fourth Grace of the Faerie 
Queene (VI, x), and with the third Elizabeth of the 
Amoretti (sonnet 74) ! In conclusion he seemed to con- 
sider Rosalind the Shepherd's Calender itself. Such is 
the malicious result of guess-work. 

The trouble with Keightley 's and all theories of that kind 
is that they cannot frankly be made to square with certain 
remarks of Spenser, Harvey, and Kirke. Consider, for in- 
stance, the following passage in Harvey's Gallant familiar 
Letter, in which he is speaking of some verses of Spenser's: 

" Now to requite your Blindfolded pretie God, . . . Imagiii 
me to come into a goodly Kentishe Garden of your old Lords, or 
some other Noble man, and spying a florishing Bay Tree there, 
to demaunde ex tempore, as f oUoweth : Thinke upon Petrarcbes 

Arbor vittoriosa, triomfale, 
Onor d'Imperadori, e di Poete: 

and perhappes it will aduance the wynges of your Imagination a 
degree higher : at the least if any thing can be added to the lofti- 
nesse of his conceite, who gentle Mistresse Rosalinde, once reported 
to haue all the Intelligences at commaundement, and an other 
time, Christened her, Segnior Pegaso."^^ 

To my mind this remark alone, which, to do Keightley 
justice, I should say that he has quoted, vouches for the 

^'.Cf. Eosalend, eel. viii, 1. 141, twice. 

* Cf. Eosalind, April gloss to 1. 26 ; June ' ' argument ' ' ; eel. xi, 
gloss to 1. 38 ; eel. xii, gloss to 1. 151. 
''Harvey, Worlcs (Grosart), I, pp. 81-2. 



224 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

actual existence of the poet's mistress as a living person. 
What would be the point in Harvey's fantastic represen- 
tation of Rosalind, the joint Muse of the two young men, 
calling Spenser her ' ' Segnior Pegaso ' ', as Keightley would 
have us avoid the difficulty ? No indeed, Harvey is merely 
having a sly poke at Spenser for the compliments which 
some lady of refined intelligence has paid him. The actu- 
ality of the living person to whom this points must be felt 
by all readers who have examined and pondered over this 
portion of Harvey's letter, even if they can find noth- 
ing in the Calerider references to Rosalind — i. e. that she 
was "a Gentlewoman of no meane house", and "the 
Widdowes daughter of the glenne" ("country Hamlet or 
borough") — which vouchsafes her reality. Again, if Rosa- 
lind is purely imaginary, how are we to account for other 
remarks, such as Spenser's statement that the Calender 
was "made in Honour of a private Personage unknowne, 
which of some yl-willers might be upbraided, not to be so 
worthie, as you (Harvey) knowe she is","- and such as 
Harvey's comment on Spenser's new mistress in London: 
"per tuam Venerem altera Rosalindula est: eamq non alter, 
sed idem ille, (tua, ut ante, bona cum gratia) copiose amat 
HohhinolusV"^^ From these notices we may not be sure of 
the quality of Spenser's sentiment, but it is resolutely 
closing one's eyes to direct testimony to conceive of Rosa- 
lind as "a purely imaginary being", the poet's Muse. 
Even in these days of literary scepticism few scholars, and 
those of lesser authority, believe that Beatrice and Laura 
had no existence in life, as Keightley also asserted (p. 
413).^* This, however, leads to a further point. 

•>' Ibid., p. 6. 
^Ibid., p. 107. 

** He also included the Corinna of Ovid, Drayton 's Idea, and 
Daniel's Delia in this categoiy. The first has always been considered 



ROSALIND 225 

If none of these solutions of Rosalind 's identity, ingenious 
as some of them are, seem worthy of belief,®^ it is at least pos- 
sible, perhaps, to tell something of the nature of Spenser's 
relation to this lady. Almost all of Spenser's biographers, 
including the theorists mentioned above, have adopted the 
opinion that the poet's sentiment for Rosalind was "the 
love of a man for a maid", the passion of a youth for his 
sweetheart.^^ That this made a deep impression upon him 
and that Rosalind still remained enshrined in his heart for 
many years they have maintained, pointing to the conclud- 
ing lines of Colin Clout's Come Home Again (11. 897- 
953) as direct evidence.^^ On the other hand, there are a 
few writers who have differed from this preponderance of 
opinion. As early as 1855 Francis James Child remarked : 
' ' there are no indications that the feeling with which Rosa- 
lind had inspired the youthful scholar fresh from the Uni- 
versity was ever very deep ; at any rate, her image had long 
since been transferred from his heart to his fancy, and 
become the object of mere poetic contemplation".®* At the 
same time, he accepted Halpin's theory,®^ which, like all 
others depending upon the literal and rigid interpretation 

Julia, the daughter of Augustus, the second Anne Goodere, and the 
third certainly a real person, although unknown (perhaps the Countess 
of Pembroke). 

**" Solutions have been numerous, but unconvincing" (J. B. 
Fletcher, Encycl. Amer.). 

^^ Hughes, I, p. ii; Ralph Church, I, p. xx; Todd, I, pp, viii-ix; 
Aiken, I, p. iv; Gilfillan, II, pp. xi-xiii; Collier, I, pp. xxvi-viii; 
Hales, p. xxii; Lowell, Prose Worlcs, IV, p. 285; Dean Church, pp. 
21-2; Grosart, I, pp. 52-61, 106; S. L. Lee, Great Englishvien, etc., 
pp. 162-3 ; Lee & Hales, D.N.B. 

^'Cf. especially, Hart, pp. 29-30; Grosart, I, pp. 38-9; Hales, pp. 
xxiii-iv. 

^ Edition of Spenser (1866), I, p. xxxviii. 

°' Lowell also thought this "extremely probable" (p. 285). 
16 



226 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

of remarks in the Calender,''^ considers Spenser the pas- 
sionate lover of Rosalind. Herford, on the other hand, 
conjured up "a pleasant picture of high-bred and cultured 
love-making" (p. xvi). Still more recently, Jusserand has 
remarked that the young poet ' ' fell sufficiently in love . . . 
to have a subject for poetical complaints", and that he 
"suffered just enough from his love-wound to have a pre- 
text for versifying".'''^ In another place he has stated 
that Spenser may have been vexed ''at her lack of respon- 
siveness"; consequently he allowed himself "some passing 
consolations" in London {i. e. altera Rosalindula) P Fin- 
ally, Professor J. B. Fletcher comes to the conclusion 
that "the poet's pretence of blighted passion implies prob- 
ably no more than regulation 'loving' gratitude to a lady- 
patron", and that, judging from his defense of her in 
Colin Clout's Come Home Again "against the charge of 
disloyal cruelty", Spenser intimates pretty clearly "that his 
' passion ' had been but ' Platonic ' tribute ' '.'^^ In view of the 
conventions of literary love-making in the days of Eliza- 
beth, copied from the Italian and French love poets of the 
Renaissance, and in view of Spenser 's study of these foreign 
models, Mr. Fletcher's theory seems to me the most worthy 
of credence. 

Petrarch, who is the father of all such amatory poets, 
never represents himself as the successful lover of Laura, 
while pastoral tradition demands that the shepherd also 
shall be unfortunate in his loves. In the tenth eclogue of 

'" Although Long has a good deal to say about Spenser 's ' ' literary- 
interests and his desire for advancement", the fact that he interprets 
literally the love-laments of Colin, even in the August sestina, shows 
that his theory logically depends upon the passionate love of the poet 
for his lady. 

"^ Literary History of the English People, II, pp. 439, 441. 

"76 id., pp. 441-2. 

" Article on Spenser in Encycl. Amer. 



EOSALIND 227 

Petrarch, where he laments the death of Laura, we see 
these two literary influences combined, since the one is fused 
with the other in the form of the pastoral. Now Spenser, 
who desired to make his way in the world, wished to cele- 
brate a certain lady's praises, and also wished to become a 
famous poet, like Virgil and Petrarch. Whether he chose 
the pastoral partly because he found it a fit vehicle of 
expression for celebrating a lady, or whether he merely 
placed this lady therein because the exigencies of this liter- 
ary form demanded such a proceeding, we do not know. 
At any rate, the two ideas supplement each other. 

What we do know, however, is that Spenser had sufficient 
artistic power to give a vivid expression to his sentiments'* 
when he wrote the Calender, and that, if he had been deeply 
in love with Rosalind, as most critics would have us believe, 
he could have portrayed the strength of his passion. No 
one who has studied the poet's art at this time of his life 
will, I believe, be disposed to deny this statement. It there- 
fore remains to be seen if the passages descriptive of Rosa- 
lind mark the presence of any deep-rooted passion, and, in 
order to determine this question, we must run briefly over 
the selections quoted at the beginning of this article. 

Rosalind first appears in the ninth stanza of the January 
eclogue, where Colin broaches the subject of his love: 

" ' A thousand sithes I curse that caref ull hower 
Wherein I longd the neighbour towne to see, 
And eke tenne thousand sithes I blesse the stoure 
Wherein I sawe so f ayre a sight as shee : 
Yet all for naught; such sight hath bred my bane. 
Ah, God ! that love should breede both joy and payne ! ' " 

(11. 49-54) 

This is Spenser's most personal expression of his feeling 
toward Rosalind to be found in the whole poem, and it does 
" Cf. his ecclesiastical satire, especially in eel. ix. 



228 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

not seem to me evidence of any strong sentiment when we 
remember the conventions of the time. Compared to the 
passionate celebration of love which runs rampant in the 
Epithalamion, it sounds strangely formal. Even Gros- 
art has admitted that Spenser's sentiment for Rosalind 
could not be compared in the strength of its reality to 
Sidney's for Stella,'^ and yet people are now beginning to 
think that Sidney 's sonnets, with all the fire and earnestness 
which they contain, do not reflect the deep passion of a 
lover for his mistress, if one makes allowance for the literary 
artifices of the age.''® If Spenser could without offence 
dedicate to Sidney's widow a poem celebrating the loves of 
Astrophel and Stella,^^ their attachment could scarcely have 
been that all-absorbing passion which so many writers have 
imagined. 

In spite of E. K.'s announcement in the Epistle that 
Spenser "compiled these xij ^glogues" in order "to miti- 
gate and allay the heate of his passion, or els to warne 
. . . the young shepheards ... of his unfortunate folly", 
a statement which I can only regard as a compliment to 
his lady, Rosalind appears in only six eclogues. In the 
"November" her name occurs only incidentally (1. 44), in 
accordance with the requirements of the poet's imitation of 
Marot, while her presence in the "August" (1. 141) merely 
serves to usher in a complicated literary exercise. It is not 
strange that the contents of this conventional love-lament 
should bear a close resemblance to the matter of the poet's 
Imnbicum Trimetrum, contained in one of his letters to 

"Spenser, Works, I, p. 60. 

^* Cf. Fox Bourne, Sidney, p. 247. In W. J. Courthope, A History 
of English Poetry, II, pp. 227-233, the idea of a romantic attach- 
ment between Sidney and Lady Kich received a complete rejection, 
while Professor J. B. Fletcher in an essay entitled Did Astrophel 
Love Stella? has declared for the theory of Platonic love. 

''''Astrophel: a Pastorall Elegie. 



ROSALIND 229 

Harvey,'* where they are regarded simply as a literary 
exercise. The plan of the Calender demanded that Rosa- 
lind should be the alleged subject of Colin 's lament. As 
for the eclogues in which Rosalind appears, she always 
plays a secondary part. In the " January " it is the Platonic 
idea of love which is the central theme, for merely three 
stanzas, and those in part only, are devoted to her. In the 
* ' April ' ' the main theme is the praise of Queen Elizabeth ; 
Spenser throws out a hint to the curious concerning Rosa- 
lind's identity, and lets E. K. pay homage to her station in 
life. Again, the statement in the June "argument" that 
"this -ZEglogue is wholly vowed to the complayning of 
Colins ill successe in his love", which "is the whole Argu- 
ment of this ^glogue", is another delicate compliment to 
the lady, for a calculation shows that this "complayning" 
occupies less than one-third of the total number of lines, 
and that the poet has therefore made it subordinate to the 
discussion on fame. Although Rosalind is perfunctorily men- 
tioned in the" December" (11. 113, 156), the poet's treat- 
ment of love here becomes impersonal. His description of 
the power of the god Love produces the same impression as 
Petrarch's Platonistie treatment of similar themes. This 
is further brought out in the October eclogue, where the 
Renaissance thirst for fame certainly outweighs any per- 
sonal love for Rosalind. The idea of chivalry, of the 
courtly homage due to a woman of culture and refinement, 
a superior being, may run through these eclogues connected 
with the Romance of Colin, but the expression of a per- 
sonal, passionate love never seems to emerge. In short, 
this opinion is firmly borne out by the celebration of Rosa- 
lind in Colin Clout's Come Home Again (1591), where the 
poet pays conventional compliments to her after his ten 
years' sojourn in Ireland. 

^» Harvey, WorJcs (Grosart), I, pp. 10-11, letter of Oct. o (16), 
1579. 



230 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

In conclusion, it appears to me that almost all of Spen- 
ser's biographers and theorists have followed the wrong 
track in regard to Rosalind. The literary artifices of the 
time, as well as the conventional influences of Court life, 
sanctioned the poet's complimentary addresses to a lady 
of a higher social position than his own. Everything in 
the Calender, from the Epistle to the Epilogue, betrays the 
fact that Spenser wished to gain the patronage of influential 
persons, and, as Rosalind is declared to be a lady "of no 
meane house ' ', the poet was no doubt sounding her praises 
either in return for past favors or in the expectation of 
new ones. What greater compliment could a young man of 
his literary attainments pay to a lady of intellectual refine- 
ment who was sprightly and arch enough to dub him her 
"Segnior Pegaso", than to avow in measured Platonic 
tones that he languished for her society ? Well indeed may 
Spenser have occupied the position of a "tutor or secre- 
tary" in her family,'^'^ and certainly one is almost tempted 
to believe that either the Althorpe Spencer or the Sidney 
family may have been the one. At least, Elizabeth Carey^" 

" Fletcher, Encycl. Amer. 

^ In a foot-note at the conclusion of his article on Spenser and 
Lady Carey {Mod. Lang. Bev., Ill, pp. 257-67), in which he seeks 
to identify Lady Carey with the Elizabeth of the Amoretti, Long 
speaks of the plausibility of the idea that Eosalind may have been 
Lady Carey (p. 267). The one reason why he cannot accept this 
view is that "E. K. states that 'Eosalinde' is an anagram", and 
that he sees ' ' no way of making this answer the ' very name ' of 
Elizabeth Carey". But, in spite of all that has been written on the 
subject, it cannot be proved that E. K. referred to an anagram when 
he wrote: "Eosalinde, is also a feigned name, which, being wel 
ordered, wil bewray the very name of hys love", etc. (Jan. gloss). 
Of the four names which he gives as examples none are anagrams of 
the names of the persons they represent. Indeed this "wel order- 
ing ' ' may easily mean nothing more than the separation of the name, 
viz. Eosa Zu!(Za = beautiful rose (Keightley). Would not such an 
appellation be a great compliment? But I do not say that Lady 



LOBBIN 



231 



or IMary Sidney must have been strangely like Rosalind as 
regards worldly position, intellectual attainments, and 
physical charm. Indeed Long has noticed that Rosalind is 
"a passable solution" for Clorinda,^^ Mary Sidney's poet- 
ical name, by which she signed herself when she wrote the 
lament for her brother, and by which she was known to the 
poets of the time. But I will leave guessing to others. The 
conclusion of the whole matter must be that, although Rosa- 
lind was undoubtedly a real person, her identity has up to 
the present time escaped discovery, a matter, however, 
which can be counter-balanced by the knowledge that she 
probably resembled Lady Carey and the Countess of Pem- 
broke in more ways than one, and that Spenser's attach- 
ment to her was that of an ambitious young poet to a lady- 
patron. 

iv. The Poet and His Patrons 

In the November eclogue Lobbin appears as a "greate 
shepheard" (1. 113) who mourns the death of Dido, ''some Lobbin 
may den of greate bloud". E. K. further remarks that 
Lobbin "seemeth to have bene the lover and deere frende of 
Dido".^ Malone (1821), I believe, was one of the first of 
modern critics to suggest that the Earl of Leicester "is 
plausibly understood under Lobbin", and with that opinion 
I heartily agree. 

The name Lobbin is evidently one of Spenser's coinages 
which happens to bear a very close resemblance to the name 

Carey was Eosalind, only that Eosalind must have been the same sort 
of a person. Mary Sidney was married on April 21, 1577, and Lady 
(Jarey probably in 1575 (Clutterbuck, Hertford, III, p. 181). The 
poet 's pretended anger with Menalcas might therefore find a basis of 
fact in the marriage of either at a time when he was contemplating - 
his poem. 

^^ Anglia, p. 82, note 2. 

' Gloss to 1. 113. 



232 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

of the person intended. "Sweet Robin "^ was the Queen's 
name for her favorite, and the courtiers followed her ex- 
ample.^ From *'my Lord of Leicester", or familiarly "my 
Lord Robin", is surely no far cry to the rustic adaptation 
of Lobbin. 

This identification, which is only too evident, receives 
further support from some lines which are placed in the 
mouth of Hobbinol (Harvey) in Colin Clout's Come 
Home Again, which undoubtedly "was originally written 
immediately after his (Spenser's) return to Ireland", i. e. 
in 1591:* 

" ' For well I wot, sith I my self e was there, 
To wait on Lobbin, (Lobbin, well thou knewest,) 
FuU many worthie ones then waiting were. 
As ever else in Princes Court thou vewest.' "' 

Colin (Spenser) has been attacking the courtiers, and 
Hobbinol answers that there are some whose lives are ex- 
emplary. The point is that he mentions Lobbin, evidently 
some nobleman at Court, and that he refers to him in the 
past tense ("knewest"). As everyone knows, Harvey had 
waited upon Leicester as a suitor before Spenser left Eng- 
land in 1580, and the Earl died in September, 1588, three 
years before Spenser in this poem alluded to him in the 
past tense. No reasonable doubt can exist concerning the 
identity of Lobbin. 

In the "argument" of the November eclogue E. K. re- 
Dido marks: "bee (Spenser) bewayleth the death of some may- 
den of greate bloud, whom he calleth Dido". To him her 
"personage is secret, and . . . altogether unknowne", al- 

='Froude, XI, p. 19; Camden Soc. FuU. (1st s.), XXVII, p. 193. 

^Froude, VIT, p. 300. 

* Hales, Life of Spenser, p. xlvii. 

" Globe ed., p. 556. 



DIDO 233 

though he professes to have often inquired of the poet. In 
the eclogue itself Dido is first mentioned when the shepherd 
Thenot suggests a subject on which Colin (Spenser) can 
lament. 

" * For deade is Dido, dead, alas ! and drent ; 
Dido ! the greate shepehearde his daughter sheene. 
The fayrest May she was that ever went. 
Her like shee has not left behinde I weene : ' " 

(11. 37-40) 

To this E. K. makes the following comment: 

"The great shepheard, is some man of high degree, and 
not, as some vainely suppose, God Pan. The person of the 
shephearde and of Dido is unknowen, and closely buried in 
the Authors conceipt. But out of doubt I am, that it is not 
Rosalind, as some imagin: for he speaketh soone after of 
her also." 

The dirge which laments the death of this girl is, as 
everyone knows, modelled upon Marot's De Mme. Loyse, 
and indeed becomes a mere paraphrase of the latter in 
places. In spite of this imitation, however, certain descrip- 
tive touches appear which must be used in any attempt at 
an identification of this maiden. Colin calls upon the in- 
habitants of Kent to mourn this grievous loss : 

" ' Shepheards, that by your flocks on Kentish downes abyde, 
Waile ye this wof ull waste of Natures worke ;' " 

(11. 63-4) 

He proceeds to tell us that he had celebrated her previously : 

" ' Sing now, ye shepheards daughters, sing no moe 
The songs that Colin made you in her praise,' " 

(11. 77-S) 

Her high position is further signified in the following 
description of her pastimes : 



234 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" ' Ne would she scorne the simple shepheards swaine ; 
For she would cal him often heame, 
And give him curdes and clouted Creame. 

Als Colin Cloute she would not once disdayne,' " 

(11. 97-101) 

Then follows the most important passage in the whole poem 
from a biographic point of view : 

" ' thou greate shepheard, Lobbin, how great is thy griefe ! 
Where bene the nosegayes that she dight for thee? 
The coloured ehaplets wrought with a chiefe, 
The knotted rush-ringes, and gilte Rosemaree'? 
For shee deemed nothing too deere for thee.' " 

(11. 113-7) 

The accompanying gloss states that Lobbin is ' ' the name of 
a shepherd, which seemeth to have bene the lover and deere 
frende of Dido". This personage is further exhorted to 
think of Dido's resurrection : 

" ' Why then weepes Lobbin so without remorse ? 
Lobb ! thy losse no longer lament ; 
Dido nis dead, but into heaven bent.' " 

(11. 167-9) 

These references furnish the sole information on the part of 
Spenser and his friends upon which to form a theory of 
identification for Dido. 

Of solutions, only two have been offered which seek to 
connect Dido with a real person, each of them resting upon 
the assumption that the Earl of Leicester is represented in 
the person of the shepherd Lobbin. This I believe to be 
true for reasons which I have just given. ^ The first of 
these appeared in 1821 from the pen of Edmond Malone in 

* Cf. supra, pp. 231-2. 



DIDO 235 

his edition of Shakespeare.'^ He believed that this maiden 
was an illegitimate daughter of Leicester by Douglas, Lady 
ShefSeld, with whom he lived for a few years dating from 
as early as 1570, probably.^ He contended that this daugh- 
ter might have been named Elizabeth after the Queen, and 
that she is to be plausibly understood by Dido, or Elisa, 
which is used in the ^neid as the Phoenician equivalent 
of Dido. He proceeds, "the fruits of that commerce were, 
I believe, this daughter, who was, perhaps, born in 1571, 
and a son, born in 1573", Robert, styled Duke of Northum- 
berland, whose age is attested by the Oxford Register. 
"The daughter, it may be presumed, died early in 1578, 
about seven years old; and dying so young, under such 
equivocal circumstances, may not have been thought worthy 
of the notice of Dugdale, Collins or any other of our genea- 
logical historians." Such are the main points offered by 
Malone. 

During the last few years this theory has been supplanted 
by another, which Mr. P. M. Buck, Jr. first presented." 
This writer suggested that the subject of Spenser's lament 
may have been Ambrosia Sidney, a sister of Philip, who 
died on February 23, 1574-5;" the chief reason which he 
advanced for this identification lay in the fact that she was 
"the only member of the Dudley family who died not far 
from the date of the Shepherd's Calender^ \ Another 
writer,^^ who arrived independently at the same conclusion 
a short while later, has embellished the theory with addi- 
tional arguments. After observing that the young lady in 

^ Shakespeare, II, pp. 214-17, note 6. 

^Misc. Geneal. et Herald, (n. s.), Ill, p. 368, 

"Mod. Lang. Notes (1906), XXI, pp. 80-1. 

'" Buck wrongly prints the date as a year later. 

"G. C. Moore Smith, Mod. Lang. Eev. (1907), II, pp. 346-7. 



236 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

question died at Ludlow Castle, Shropshire,^^ Mr. G. C. 
Moore Smith remarks: "the fact that it is Kentish shep- 
herds who are invoked is an evidence that this young kins- 
woman of Leicester 's was a Sidney ' '. On the one hand, he 
gives no reason for this statement, while, on the other, it is 
impossible to say whether the relation of Dido to Lobbin 
really was that of a kinswoman. 

Although he acknowledges that he has not "found any 
evidence that Ambrosia Sidney was drowned" (c/. 1. 37), 
or that she was not, for that matter, he appears to place 
some value upon the following line in the description of 
Dido's apotheosis: 

" * There drineks she Nectar with Ambrosia mixt,' " 

(1. 185) 

While he admits that the original of this may be found 
in Marot {odour amhrosienne) , he considers the introduc- 
tion of Ambrosia's name an interesting coincidence. Buck 
also quotes the above mentioned line with like intention, 
and one finds students of Spenser accepting the theory 
chiefly upon this last hint. The same expression, however, 
occurs elsewhere, where there can be no allegorical allusion. 
In The Ruines of Time those "whom the Pierian sacred 
sisters love" 

" with the Gods, for former vertues neede, 
On Nectar and Ambrosia do feede." 

(11. 198-9) 

Likewise, in the Amoretti the poet tells us that after his 
mistress had smiled upon him, 

" Mr. Smith, however, makes the mistake of supposing that Am- 
brosia Sidney was born in 1555. A reference to the State Papers 
disproves this assertion (Cal. State Papers, Foreign, 1560, p. 350), 
for Ambrosia was born at Hampton Court early in October, 1560, 
and enjoyed the honor of having Queen Elizabeth for god-mother. 



DIDO 237 

"More sweet than Nectar, or Ambrosiall meat, 
Seemd every bit which thenceforth I did eat." 

(sonnet xxxix)^^ 

I cannot believe, therefore, that the conventional appear- 
ance of this word ambrosia has any bearing upon the 
solution of Dido 's identity. 

Another reason, — the conjectured closeness of the bond 
between Philip and his sister Ambrosia on the score of the 
nearness of their ages, — must be thrown out of court, for 
Ambrosia was six years the younger. Probably her death 
gave no great shock to his nature, for after a three years' 
absence abroad he plunged into all the gaieties of Court 
life on his return in May, 1575, shortly after his sister's 
death. Moreover, if Ambrosia were the subject of this 
verse, we should naturally expect either Philip or his 
father to be represented as chief mourner, — a view sup- 
ported by the dedication of the poem to the former, — rather 
than Leicester, whose life at Court may never have allowed 
him an opportunity of seeing his young niece after her 
infancy. This theory, therefore, requires further evidence 
if it is to be accepted. 

The most important hints which Spenser and E. K. have 
given are that Dido met her death by drowning, that she 
was a "mayden of greate bloud", and that Lobbin, as we 
have seen, is described as a "great shepheard" (1. 113). 
Now the father of Dido is called "the greate shephearde" 
(1. 38). Malone assumed that the two were identical, a 
proposition, however, which requires support in the way of 
argument. Without the gloss few would hesitate to believe 

" Cf. also the * * ambrosiall odours ' ' of the flowers which adorn the 
Medway as the bride of the Thames (F. Q., IV, xi, 46). Likewise, in 
the Daphna'ida, although the daughter of Douglas Howard, Lady 
Gorges, was named Ambrosia (cf. 1. 270), we find no play upon her 
name. 



238 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

that Lobbin and the father of Dido were one and the same 
person. Whether E. K. did not possess the poet's con- 
fidence, as lie contends, or whether lie knew his inmost 
thoughts, seems to me to make little difference at this point. 
Indeed Malone thought that he was unaware of Lobbin 's 
identity (p. 216), but such a view seems altogether improb- 
able owing to Spenser's employment by Leicester at the 
time when the Calender was being completed, something 
which all his intimates must have known. Judging from 
E. K.'s policy of misleading Spenser's readers in regard to 
his models, and judging from his artful disavowals of polit- 
ical satire in the ecclesiastical eclogues, it is reasonable to 
suppose that he knew about Dido and that he denied this 
knowledge in deference to Spenser's desire. I therefore 
believe that he is deliberately attempting to mystify the 
reader concerning Lobbin 's identity with ''the greate 
shepehearde", the father of Dido, when he calls the former 
her "lover and deere frende". Although Malone 's reasons 
are not altogether cogent or freed from inaccuracies, I 
believe that his theory is true, on account of the probable 
correctness of Lobbin 's (Leicester's) identification with 
"the greate shepehearde", the father of Dido. This view, 
however, needs a rehabilitation in the shape of correction 
of mistakes and additional evidence. 

The relations of Leicester and Lady Sheffield are en- 
shrouded in an atmosphere of mystery, but the following 
account of their relations is probably close to the truth. 
This lady, the eldest daughter of William, Lord Howard of 
Effingham, by his second wife, was married to John, Lord 
Sheffield, about the year 1562, when she was seventeen years 
of age. During her husband's life-time, who died in De- 
cember, 1568, not without suspicion of poison, she had an 
intrigue with the Earl of Leicester. About 1570 she en- 
tered into a contract of marriage with this nobleman at 



DIDO 239 

Cannon Row, Westminster, and two years later they were 
married at her residence^* at Esher in Surrey.^^ A letter 
of Gilbert Talbot to his father, the Earl of Shrewsbury, 
under date of May 10, 1573, recounts among other bits of 
Court gossip that Lady Sheffield and her younger sister, 
Francis Howard, were "very far in love" with Leicester, 
that they were acknowledged rivals for his hand, and ' ' that 
the queen liked not well of them nor the better of him"/^ 
Some time earlier in this year a son was born, the future 
self-styled Duke of Northumberland, whose age was 
recorded as fourteen in the Oxford Register when he matric- 
ulated on May 7, 1587. Leicester subsequently sought to 
repudiate this marriage by offering Lady Sheffield £700 
yearly to disregard it, together with a £1000 payment for 
the custody of their son. At her refusal he threatened to 
take her life, and so terrified her that she married Sir 
Edward Stafford^^ for protection shortly before September 
21, 1578, the date of Leicester's legalized marriage to the 
Countess of Essex. By this proceeding she seemed to ac- 
knowledge the invalidity of her union with Leicester, 
although few writers have doubted its legality. The 
secrecy attending this marriage was due to Leicester's 
fear of arousing the Queen's anger, which broke out so 
violently in the summer of 1579 when she found that he 
had married the Countess of Essex. At any rate, although 

" N. H. Nicolas, Eeport of Proceedings on the Claim to the Barony 
of L'Isle, pp. 167, 254. 

" The Diet. Nat. Biog. places the date of this marriage in May, 
1573, two days before the birth of a son. No authority is given for 
this statement, and it lies open to grave suspicion owing to Lord 
Talbot's account of Lady Sheffield's presence at Court during this 
month. 

" Quoted by Strype, Annals, II, pt. 1, p. 457. 

" Sir Edward Stafford, who became Elizabeth 's ambassador at 
the Court of France in 1583, was a friend of Philip Sidney (Fox 
Bourne, Sir Philip Sidney, p. 295). 



240 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Leicester made this son his heir in his will, the latter never 
succeeded in establishing a right to his father's titles.^* 

The only statement for the existence of a daughter by this 
marriage is contained in Leycester's Commonwealth, an ex- 
travagant attack on Leicester's life, which appeared anony- 
mously in 1584, and which was formerly thought to have 
been the work of Robert Parsons, the Jesuit. Present opin- 
ion considers the author some courtier of the time whom 
Leicester had injured. Although many of the allegations 
here laid to Leicester 's charge are hardly credible, yet there 
must have been some basis of truth to a few of them, since 
stories circulated against this nobleman did not cease even 
with his death. This book mentions a daughter born at 
Dudley Castle, Staffordshire, the seat of Edward Sutton, 
Lord Dudley, who was a cousin of Leicester. It further 
declares that his wife, Lady Dudley, the sister of Lady 
Sheffield, in order to conceal the maternity of the latter, 
pretended to be delivered of a child.^^ Whether this 
daughter actually existed we have no other means of ascer- 
taining. In view of the probability that Spenser intended 
Lobbin for the father of Dido, and in view of the parallel 
between the lives of the Dido of the Mneid and Douglas 
Sheffield, each of whom was deserted by her lover, I am in- 
clined to accept the testimony of the Commonwealth. In 
fact the latter coincidence is indeed striking. Another 
point which bears out a belief in the existence of a daughter 
is that the intrigue between Leicester and Lady Sheffield 

^* This account of Lady Sheffield is taken chiefly from an article 
by B. W. Greenfield in Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, III 
(n. s.), pp. 368-70. Practically the sole authoritative information 
regarding her is contained in Camden's Annals, Gervase Holies 's 
Memoirs of the Holies Family, Dugdale's Warwiclcshire and 
Baronage, and the account of the law suit in the Star Chamber over 
Leicester's titles. Greenfield's account is a digest of these. 

"Op. cit., pp. 29, 33-4. 



DIDO 241 

began as early as 1568, whereas their son was not born until 
1573. The strong probability is that there must have been 
another fruit of this union before 1573 in view of its con- 
tinuance for a number of years. Although no record 
remains of this girl's death, I believe with Malone that 
Dugdale, Collins, and other genealogists may not have 
thought it worth while to record the fact, since she died at 
so early an age and ''under such equivocal circumstances" 
(p. 216). 

Finally, there is another coincidence which is certainly 
worth recording. Dido is described as 

" the great shephearde his daughter sheene." 

(1. 38) 

In annotating E. K. writes the last word shene. Now 
Shene was the older and historic name for Richmond 
(Surrey) and its palace, and it was here that Douglas Shef- 
field resided while the Court was there. It was also the 
birth-place of her son.^'^ Her residence at Esher, the scene 
of the clandestine marriage, lay only seven miles distant. 
This daughter, like the son, must have resided with her 
mother, sometimes at Esher and sometimes at Shene or 
Richmond, and it is altogether possible that Spenser may 
have seen her when he visited the Court in Leicester's ser- 
vice.^^ Probably it was here that this little girl saw her 
father, with whom she may have lived for a part of the 
year. The picture of Dido, who dights "nosegayes" and 
weaves "coloured ehaplets", "knotted rush-rings", and 
"gilte Rosemaree" (11. 114-6) for Lobbin, might well be a 
true description of Leicester playing with his young daugh- 

'" B. W. Greenfield, op. cit. 

^^ Daphna'ida was written in honor of Lady Sheffield's niece and 
name-sake, Douglas Howard, wife of Arthur Gorges. Cf. the foot-note 
at the end of the article on the February eclogue for Spenser's rela- 
tions to the Howard family (pp. 70-1). 

17 



242 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

ter in moments when he was freed from the heavier cares 
of Court intrigue. The fact that he attempted to get pos- 
session of his son shows that he was capable of feeling 
paternal affection. Hence the allusion to Shene could be 
understood by those in the secret. On the other hand, the 
fact that the Kentish shepherds are called upon to lament 
does not prove that Dido was a Sidney. Kent and Surrey 
were closely connected in Spenser's mind in reference to 
Leicester, as the April gloss indicates (1. 21), and in Kent 
lay Penshurst, the home of the Sidneys, who might be 
expected to lament the death of this maiden, their kins- 
woman. Indeed she may have died in Kent, for all that we 
know. 

In short, the theory which Malone advanced, when its 
mistakes are corrected, and when new reasons are brought 
forward, seems to me much more plausible than that which 
presents Ambrosia Sidney as the theme of the lament. In 
fact one might call it certain, if the identification of Lobbin 
with the father of Dido could be unhesitatingly accepted. 
If true, it certainly bears witness that Spenser enjoyed the 
confidence of Leicester to a strong degree, or perhaps that 
he thought that he did. From this point of view the 
November eclogue furnishes an interesting parallel to 
Virgil's Gnat.^^ 

^ In view of the fact that revivals of accusations against Leicester 
charging him with the death of his first Avife, Amy Eobsart, were 
current as late as 1584, when Leycester's Commonwealth appeared, it 
might not be so ridiculous as it at first seems to connect Dido with 
this ill-fated lady. When Leicester was in disgrace in 1579, pre- 
sumably these sinister rumors revived. Spenser, who had the Earl's 
ear, would then have had an opportunity of testifying to Leicester's 
unfeigned sorrow over the loss of this wife, giving drowning as the 
cause of her death. Again, Dido might plausibly represent one of 
Leicester's many mistresses, none of whose names have come down 
to us. Such theories pre-suppose the idea that Lobbin and ' ' the 
greate shepehearde" are not the same. 



PHILIP SIDNEY 243 

One of the most interesting subjects in the whole life of ^^._,^ ^ 
Edmund Spenser is his connection with Philip Sidney, and Philip 
it is certainly at the heart-root of any discussion of the 
biographical aspects of the Shepherd's Calender because of 
the dedication. Although the exact nature of their asso- 
ciation must always be a matter of opinion, a new sifting 
of the evidence, together with the judgments of the more 
important Spenserian writers, is demanded in a work of 
this kind. Just what the nature of this relation was, in 
the whole range from intimate friendship to patronage and 
subserviency, I shall attempt to estimate. 

The actual allusions to Sidney in the poetry of Spenser 
are neither numerous nor yet few in number. In the first 
place there is the dedication of the Calender, ''to the noble 
and vertuous gentleman, most worthy of all titles both of 
learning and chevalrie, IMaister Philip Sidney". In the 
prologue, "To his Booke", which follows, Sidney is alluded 
to as 

" the president 
Of noblesse and of chevalrie : " 

and as "his honor". The last title Spenser uses of Sidney 
in his letters to Harvey. The same kind of language ap- 
pears in the Epistle: "the Noble and worthy gentleman 
... a special favourer and maintainer of all kind of 
learning". This dedication, however, may be regarded as 
a stereotyped form, regulated then, as sometimes at the 
present day, by literary and social conventions. In the 
poem itself, on the other hand, although his uncle Leicester 
is respectfully introduced as the "Southerne shephearde" 
(iv, 1. 21)-^ and as Lobbin (xi), allusion is not made to 
Sidney.-* 

* Of course, it is entirely possible, as many writers have believed, 
that Sidney was the ' ' Southerne ' ' shepherd. The description in the 
gloss, to my mind at least, points more closely to Leicester, who was 



244 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

According to the chronological order in point of publica- 
tion, Spenser's next reference to Sidney occurs in the 
sonnet to the Countess of Pembroke prefixed to the first 
three books of the Faerie Queene (1589), in which his mem- 
ory occupies the chief place.^^ The succeeding mention of 
him is in that series of poems which composes The Ruines 
of Time (1591), and which, owing to its description of 
members of the Dudley family, is supposed to contain 
material formerly used in the unpublished Stemmata Dud- 
leiana,-^ The dedication to the Countess of Pembroke 
and nine stanzas in the main body of the poem, together 
with two allusions in the second group of "visions",-^ 
sound the praises of Sidney, and have been cited in proof of 
the warm friendship which existed between the two poets. 
Astrophel (1595) is "a Pastorall Elegie upon the death of 
the most noble and valorous knight Sir Philip Sidney". 
It follows the conventions of pastoral tradition, and is 
largely concerned with the love-affairs of its unfortunate 
hero. The narrative form also contributes to render faint 
any personal note of sorrow. At the same time The Dole- 
full Lay of Clorinda, written by Sidney's sister and pub- 

a nobleman, and who employed Spenser ("Colin perteyneth to," 
etc.). Now neither of these remarks is strictly applicable to 
Sidney. 

-* I cannot believe with P. M. Buck, Jr. (Mod. Lang. Notes, XXI, 
p. 80), that Perigot (eel. viii) is Sidney, and that the singing-match 
contains ' ' a covert allusion to the love of Sir Philip Sidney for 
his Stella, Penelope Devereux ' '. Sidney 's passion for Stella was not 
aroused until after her marriage (1581), and therefore Spenser could 
not refer to what did not exist at the time when he wrote. Cf. Fox 
Bourne, Sidney, p. 239. 

^ As I shall have occasion to discuss this later, I shall not quote 
it at present. 

^'' In Harvey, WorTcs (Grosart), I, p. 39, Spenser speaks of this 
poem in April, 1580. 

"All these wiU be discussed later. 



PHILIP SIDNEY 245 

lished in the Astrophel volume, reflects a hardly less stereo- 
typed form of grief, and yet the sincerity of her affec- 
tion for her brother is beyond question. 

In Colin Clout's Come Home Again (1595)-^ the follow- 
ing references are made to Sidney : 

" All these,-^ and many others mo remaine, 
Now, after Astrofell is dead and gone: 
But, while as Astrofell did live and raine, 
Amongst all these was none his paragone." 

(Globe ed., p. 554) 

" Ne lesse praise-worthie Stella do I read, 
Though nought my praises of her needed aiTe, 
Whom verse of noblest shepheard lately dead 
Hath prais'd and rais'd above each other starre." 

{ibid.) 

Such are all the certain references to Sir Philip Sidney 
in the poetry of Spenser. Nevertheless, various writers 
have supposed that Spenser was covertly alluding to Sidney 
in other parts of his poetry. In the Shepherd's Calender 
the mention of Kent, which occurs six times in the text"** 
and thrice in the gloss,^^ has been taken as an indication 
that Spenser composed several eclogues at Penshurst. 
Especially has the following passage of the July eclogue 
been cited in proof of this : 

" But little needes to strow my store, 
Suffice this hill of our. 

Here has the salt Medway his sourse, 
Wherein the Nymphes doe bathe; 
The salt Medway, that trickling stremis 
Adowne the dales of Kent." 

(U. 75-82) 

^Substantially written before December 27, 1591. 

^ Contemporaneous poets whom Spenser has been enumerating. 

=" Eclogues ii, 11. 74, 93 ; vii, 11. 44, 82 ; ix, 1. 153 ; xi, 1. 63. 

^ Eel. iv, gloss to 1. 21; eel. vi, gloss to 1. 31; eel. ix, gloss to 1. 153. 



246 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

This opinion, however, is speculative. In general, the 
Calender does not reflect the scenery of Kent, but that 
of conventional Arcadia. In the February eclogue Kent 
is called the home of Tityrus (Chaucer), and throughout 
the Calender it is either used colloquially — e. g. "as lythe 
as lasse of Kent" — or stands symbolically for the south of 
England in contrast to the north (Cambridge). Of course, 
it is possible that Spenser, like Virgil in the Bucolica, is 
alluding in the passage above to a place which he had 
himself visited, and it is likewise true that "this hill of 
our" (1, 76) may have been one of those hills within a 
short distance — five miles or so — of Penshurst, such as Ide 
Hill, Toys Hill, or the higher ground in the Weald, in each 
of which a small tributary of the Medway took its origin.^^ 
Tradition, indeed, prefers to believe that Spenser visited 
Penshurst, and, although this may have been true, espe- 
cially on account of his employment by Philip Sidney's 
uncle, the local allusions in the Calender do not furnish 
a trustworthy guide.^^ 

The celebrated description of the perfect courtier in the 
Mother Huhherd's Tale (U. 717-792), beginning 

" Yet the brave Courtier, in whose beauteous thought 
Regard of honour harbours more than ought," 

has been generally accepted as a portrait of Sidney.^* 
Spenser, along with many of his countrymen, probably 
recognized in Sidney a model of all courtly graces and 
attainments, and he may have intended in this description 
to pay a compliment to his memory, just as numerous other 
writers had done at the time of his death. The whole pas- 

^- The principal source of the Medway lay a short distance west of 
Crowhurst, Surrey, situated at about eight miles from Penshurst. 

^* Notice the local descriptive touches in the river category of the 
Faerie Quccne, TV, xi. The poet could never have visited all these. 

^* Grosart, I, p. 449 ; Fox Bourne, p. 245. 



PHILIP SIDNEY 247 

sage is an exemplification of the Renaissance conception of 
the perfect courtier, which found its noblest expression in 
Castiglione's Cortigiano, and in the portrayal of his picture 
Spenser laid hold of those details which were found in the 
popular "conduct" books of this age. While the tradi- 
tional view of this allusion may therefore be accepted, 
nothing in the whole passage argues for an intimate friend- 
ship, as some writers have claimed.^^ 

In the same way, the Faerie Queene has been employed 
to throw light upon the relations of the two poets. The 
Calidore of the sixth book, the knight of Courtesy, was 
generally considered to represent Sir Philip Sidney. An- 
other recent article by Mr. P. W. Long,^^ however, has made 
it extremely probable that Essex, not Sidney, furnished the 
original for Calidore, a conclusion fully warranted by this 
royal favorite's patronage of the poet.^^ Likewise, Sidney 
has been claimed as the original for Prince Arthur, and 
perhaps Spenser thought of him, as well as of other 
knights, when he drew this image of ''magnificence". 
Nevertheless, the relation must remain hypothetical, for this 
knight of "faerie" can never be certainly identified with 
Sidney, as he can with Leicester (I, ix; V). Spenser's 
Renaissance studies enabled him to portray the courtly 
ideal of the perfect man, which Sidney, among others, was 
considered to typify, but which, on account of its scale, 
transcended in his mind any photograph of this chivalrous 
hero. 

So much for Spenser's poetry. In his correspondence 
the following allusions to Sidney occur : 

^ Grosart, I, pp. 449-52, for instance, produces an entirely erro- 
neous idea of the "brave Courtier" passage. It contains no per- 
sonal allusions to Sidney or anyone else, as far as details are con- 
cerned. 

^^Englische Studien (1910), XLII, pp. Iff. 

" Cf. especially the dedicatory sonnet to the Earl of Essex pre- 
fixed to the Faerie Queene. 



248 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" As for the two worthy Gentlemen, Master Sidney and Master 
Dyer, they have me, I thanke them, in some use of familiarity : of 
whom, and to whome, what speache passeth for youre credite and 
estimation, I leave your selfe to conceive, having alwayes so well 
conceived of my unfained affection and zeale towards you. . . . 
Newe Bookes I heare of none, but only of one, that writing a 
certain Booke, called The Schoole of Abuse, and dedicating 
it to Maister Sidney, was for hys labor scorned : if at leaste it be 
in the goodnesse of that nature to scome. . . . Suche mighte I 
happily incurre entituling My Slomber and the other Pamph- 
lets unto his honor" (Sidney)." 

"I will imparte yours (Harvey's "Iambics") to Maister 
Sidney and Maister Dyer at my nexte going to the Courte."^^ 

..." Of all things let me heare some Newes from you. As 
gentle M. Sidney, I thanke his good Worship, hath required of 
me, and so promised to doe againe."**^ 

" I would hartily wish, you would either send me the Rules and 
precepts of Arte, which you observe in Quantities, or else followe 
mine, that M. Philip Sidney gave me, being the very same which 
M. Drant devised, but enlarged with M. Sidney's own iudgement, 
and augmented with my Observations, that we might both accorde 
and agree in one : leaste we overthrowe one an other, and be over- 
thrown of the rest. Truste me, you will hardly believe what 
greate good liking and estimation Maister Dyer had of your 
Satyricall Verses. . . . "*^ 

Similar references in Harvey's answers are confined to 
one letter : 

"I cannot choose, but thanke and honour the good Aungell, 
whether it were Gabriell or some other that put so good a notion 
into the heads of these two excellent Gentlemen M. Sidney, and 
M. Dyer, the two very Diamondes of her Maiesties Courte for 

*« Letter of October 5 (16), 1579, in Harvey, WorJcs (Grosart), 
I, pp. 7-8. 
^'Ibid., p. 9. 
" lUd., p. 17. 
" Letter of April 10, 1580, ibid., pp. 36-7. 



PHILIP SIDNEY 249 

many speciall and rare qualities: ... I would gladly be ac- 
quainted with M. Drants Prosodye, and I beseeche you, commende 
me to good M. Sidneys iudgement, and gentle M. Immeritos Ob- 
sei'vations."*^ 

" Tell me in good sooth, doth it not too evidently appeare, that 
this English Poet wanted but a good patterne before his eyes, 
as it might be some delicate, and choyce elegant Poesie of good 
M. Sidneys, or M. Dyers (ouer veiy Castor, & Pollux for such 
and many greater matters) when this trimme geere was in 
hatching."*^ 

In view of the rather formal and certainly respectful 
nature of these utterances, it is well to remember that these 
letters were given to the world (1580), and that they there- 
fore may have been purposely couched in "dress" language. 

From the foregoing allusions in the poetry and corre- 
spondence of Spenser the imagination of a succession of 
biographers has conjured into being the existence of an 
intimate friendship between the two poets. Tradition,** 
doubtlessly fostered to some extent by the fictions of earlier 
writers,*^ although the latter have now been generally dis- 
carded, has come to speak with the voice of authority. Let 
us briefly review the growth of this idea of Spenser's asso- 
ciation with Sidney during the past century, until it has 
crystallized into the present theory of an intimate friend- 
ship: 

*^ A Gallant familiar Letter, ibid., pp. 75-6. 

^ Ibid., p. 86; Harvey is referring to his Speculum Tuscanismi, 
which he is communicating to Spenser. 

** Even Dean Church, Spenser 's best biographer in the opinion of 
Messrs. Hales and Lee (D. N. B.), has remarked: "tradition makes 
him Sidney's companion at Penshurst" (p. 23). 

** Edward Phillips 's statement that Spenser went to Ireland as Sir 
Henry Sidney's secretary {Tlieatrum Poet. Angl., p. 148), and the 
story found in the Life by Hughes (pp. iii-iv) of Sidney's first 
reading of the canto of Despair, are the chief instances of this 
spurious tradition. 



250 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" It is not to be doubted . . . that Sidney was a warm and 
liberal friend to Spenser" (Aiken, 1806, I, p. v). 

" Under the influence ... of warm hearts and kindred tastes, 
acquaintance soon ripened into friendship, and friendship into 
intimacy; — and few months elapsed after the first interview, 
before the young poet was at home in the hospitable mansion of 
the most powerful earl in England" (Hart, 1847, p. 32). 

" The relation of the ' newe poete ' to Sir Philip Sidney was 
of ' friendship ' in the deepest and tenderest sense of the word " 
(Grosart, 1882^, I, p. 443).46 

" This acquaintance rapidly ripened into a deep and tender 
friendship, of singular and excellent influence, both morally and 
intellectually" (Hales & Lee, B.N.B., 1898, art. Spenser). 

Others entitled to speak with authority have pronounced 
less certainly in favor of the closeness of this bond : 

" The poet (Spenser) was also invited to the family-seat of 
Sidney at Penshurst in Kent, where he was probably employed in 
some literary service, and at least assisted, we may suppose, the 
Platonick and chivalrous studies of the gallant and learned youth 
who had thus kindly noticed him" (Todd, 1805, I, p. ix). 

" He is believed to have accompanied Sidney (probably as a 
secretary or amanuensis) to the family seat of Penshurst in 
Kent" (Gilfillan, 1859, II, p. xiv). 

" Before the publication of his Shepherd's Calendar in 1579, 
he had made the acquaintance of Sir Philip Sidney, and was 
domiciled with him for a time at Penshurst, whether as guest or 
literary dependent is uncertain " (Lowell, 1875, Prose Works, 
IV, p. 286). 

"He (Sidney) brought him (Spenser) forward: perhaps he 
accepted him as a friend" (Dean Church, p. 23). 

These last, however, are distinctly in the minority when 
compared with the upholders of the theory of a close and 

*'Dr. Grosart uncompromisingly declared for the intimate friend- 
ship of Sidney and Spenser in an article contained in the appendix 
of his edition of Spenser (I, pp. 443-56). 



i 



PHILIP SIDNEY 251 

warm friendship. Sidney's principal biographers, on the 
other hand, diverge considerably in their views on this 
subject : 

" If Spenser had a useful patron in the Earl of Leicester, he 
had a far more useful friend in Sidney ... at first — to some 
extent always — the difference in rank between the two caused 
Spenser to regard himself, doubtless without being so regarded 
by them, as inferior to Sidney and the other courtiers who wel- 
comed his company" (Fox Bourne, 1862, revised 1891, p. 197).*'^ 

" Though Philip and Spenser had met often, but met only 
during a period of very few months, their liking for each other 
was sincere and cordial; on Spenser's side, if we may judge by 
his written words, he felt a most warm affection for Philip. 
But there is scant reason . . . for the belief that an intimate 
friendship existed between the two. Philip was the last man in 
the world to become the intimate of any man on the sudden." 
(Addleshaw, 1909, pp. 264^) 

The late Mr. J. A. Symonds, who wrote the life of Sidney 
for the English Men of Letters Series (1887), had nothing 
to say of the existence of this friendship. It is therefore 
clear that the bulk of opinion in favor of a close and warm, 
even intimate, friendship has proceeded from Spenser's 
biographers, whereas Sidney's do not sanction this view. 
One reason for this result is to be found in the enthusiasm 
which has prompted zealous persons to read into Spenser's 
testimony on Sidney more than the literary conventions of 
the time warranted. This opinion leads back to a discus- 
sion of the principal portions in Spenser's poetry which 
have been used in support of the idea of a warm friendship, 
and all of which, it is worth noticing, were written after 
Sidney's death. 

The first of these is the dedicatory sonnet to the Countess 
of Pembroke prefixed to the Faerie Queene : 

" Cf. also p. 200 : ' ' Spenser . . , hardly aspired to rank with 
courtiers ' '. 



252 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" Remembraunce of that most Heroicke spirit, 
The hevens pride, the gloi-y of our daies. 
Which now triumpheth, through immortall merit 
Of his brave vertues, erownd with lasting baies 
Of hevenlie blis and everlasting praies; 
Who first my Muse did lift out of the flore, 
To sing his sweet delights in lowlie laies ; 
Bids me, most noble Lady," etc. 

Certainly Spenser was referring to the Shepherd's Cal- 
ender and to the protection which he imagined that Sid- 
ney gave it on account of the dedication.*^ This surely 
expresses no more than the acknowledgment that Sidney 
had acted as his patron, and probably that he had inspected 
the work before its appearance, as Spenser has elsewhere 
intimated.*** The purpose of this dedicatory sonnet, as 
well as of the other sixteen, was to interest influential per- 
sons in his new poem. In this presentation to his new 
patron, the Countess of Pembroke, whom he had undoubt- 
edly known many years previous to 1589, he laid hold of the 
compliment which would best please her, that of associating 
her with her famous brother, and at the same time gave the 
latter the credit for whatever had been worthy in his earlier 
poem, a method constantly used by the poets of this age.^" 

In the address to the same lady prefixed to The Riiines of 
Time Spenser himself has summarized the nature of his 
relation to Sidney: 

" Most Honourable and bountifull Ladie, there bee long sithens 
deepe sowed in my brest the seede of most entire love and humble 
affection unto that most brave Knight, your noble brother de- 
ceased, which, taking roote, began in his life time some what to 

*' Harvey, Works (Grosart), I, pp. 6 and 8. 

** Letter of October 5 (16), 1579. 

"" Cf. Daniel, dedicatory sonnet to the Countess of Pembroke pre- 
fixed to Delia. By this lady Daniel had been employed as secretary, 
and as tutor to her son. 



PHILIP SIDNEY 253 

bud forth, and to shew themselves to him, as then in the weakenes 
of their first spring; And would in their riper strength (had it 
pleased high God till then to drawe out his daies) spired forth 
fruit of more perfection. But since God hath disdeigned the 
world of that most noble Spirit, which was the hope of all learned 
men, and the Patron of my young Muses, togeather with him both 
their hope of anie further fruit was cut off, and also the tender 
delight of those their first blossoms nipped and quite dead. Yet, 
sithens my late cumming into England, some frends of mine, . . . 
knowing with howe straight bandes of duetie I was tied to him, 
as also bound unto that noble house, (of which the chief e hope 
then rested in him) have sought to revive them by upbraiding 
me, for that I have not shewed anie thankefull remembrance 
towards him or any of them, but suffer their names to sleep in 
silence and forgetfulnesse." 

Spenser has here taken pains to point out the respectful 
nature of his attachment to Sidney, — i. e. "the seede of 
most entire love and humble affection", — the admiration 
for a gracious gentleman of superior birth from whom he 
had received favors. This sentiment "began in his life 
time somewhat to bud forth", although, probably owing to 
the short period of time during which the two were thrown 
together, it never led to a close personal relationship {i. e. 
"in the weakenes of their first spring"). That the allusion 
does not concern "the slenderness of the Poet's erewhile 
verse-expressions" in honor of Sidney, as Grosart has con- 
tended (I, p. 449), is borne out by what follows, — i. e. the 
"hope of anie further fruit" for his "young Muses" was 
"cut off" by the early death of this patron. This "fruit", 
the same as the "fruit of more perfection", is the result 
of Spenser's poetry, — i. e. the ripening of his acquaintance 
with Sidney, — but this "fruit" has been "cut off" by the 
latter 's death. Therefore, although Spenser may write in 
praise of his former patron, he will reap no "fruit", or 
benefit, in the way of assistance from Sidney. Contrary 



254 Spenser's shepherd s calender 

to what Grosart has maintained, these passages relate to 
the degree of association which subsisted between the two, 
and not to Spenser's poetical celebrations of Sidney. Per- 
haps the fact that the poet had not seen Mary Sidney for 
ten years, during his absence in Ireland, may account for 
some part of the formality of this dedication, noticeable 
in comparison with the tones of others in the Complaints. 
But, even allowing for this, the whole address indicates 
a realization on the part of the poet of the great difference 
in social position between himself and the Sidneys. As he 
expressed the connection, Philip Sidney was the "Patron" 
of his "young Muses". 

In the same way, the stanzas in praise of Sidney con- 
tained in this poem ought not rightly to be interpreted as 
indicating a former intimate friendship. Inspired by the 
influence of Platonic ideals, Spenser has identified the 
memory of Sidney with the spirit of poetry, with the beauty 
of the universe : 

" His blessed spirite, full of power divine 
And influence of all celestiall grace, 
Loathing this sinful earth and earthlie slime, 
Fled back too soone unto his native place; 
Too soone for all that did his love embrace. 
Too soone for all this wretched world, whom he 
Robd of all right and true nobilitie." 

(11. 288-94) 

It is the same idea which is found in Lycidas and Adonais. 
In the middle of this elegy he invokes the Countess of 
Pembroke : 

" That her to heare I feele my feeble spright 
Robbed of sense, and ravished with joy :" 

(11. 320-1) 

This extravagant kind of flattery is, of course, character- 



PHILIP SIDNEY 265 

istic of Elizabethian poets in their relations to patrons, and 
its appearance amid serious verse devoted to eulogy of the 
dead is typical of the Renaissance fashion of intermingling 
gay and sad, pagan and Christian motifs. At the same 
time, this poetry cannot be separated sufficiently from the 
literary ideas with which it is invested to testify to what 
the exact nature of the relation between Spenser and Sid- 
ney may have been. It therefore should not be used as 
evidence in favor of an intimate friendship, as several 
writers have done.^^ 

In the same way, Astrophel is evidence that Spenser, 
along with "hundreds of Sir Philip Sidney's contempo- 
raries",^^ celebrated the glory of this flower of knighthood. 
The fact that Spenser wrote it at all testifies to his grief at 
Sidney's death, but its narrative pastoral form leaves no 
opportunity for the expression of a poignant sorrow. It 
likewise cannot be fairly used as indicating the exact nature 
of Spenser's sentiment, as I have previously intimated.^^ 

On the other hand, what are the references to Spenser to 
be found in Sidney's works? There is exactly one, and that 
is all, the critical remark on the Shepherd's Calender 
contained in the Apologie for Poetrie.^* Sidney reserved 
his acknowledgments of friendship for those men with 
whom he was really on terms of intimacy — Fulke Gre- 
ville, Dyer, and Languet.^^ Giordiano Bruno, Thomas 

" Grosart, I, pp. 452-3; Hales, p. xxxv; Dean Church, p. 106. 

^^ Fox Bourne, p. 360. Fully two hundred volumes of memorials 
appeared (D. N. B.). 

^ The tone of this poem greatly resembles that of Daphna'ida, 
yet Spenser had not known the lady, Douglas Howard, whom he cele- 
brated in the latter poem (c/. its dedication). 

" Ed. J. C. Collins, p. 51. 

^ Cf. Sidney 's Two Pastoralls, which appeared in Davison 's Poetical 
Bhapsody, his correspondence with Languet, and "the song I sang 
old Languet had me taught" (Arcadia). 



256 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Lodge, and Gabriel Harvey dedicated writings to Sidney, 
but it does not appear that Sidney's interest in them ever 
approached any degree of intimacy. 

Testimony in favor of any intimate friendship between 
Sidney and Spenser on the part of their contemporaries, 
men like Puttenham, Webbe, Nashe, Jonson, Harington, and 
others who have often mentioned these poets in their works, 
is entirely lacking. Even Harvey in his writings which fol- 
lowed the Spenser correspondence has connected them only 
as poets : 

" Good sweete Oratour, be a deuine Poet indeede : . . . and with 
heroicall Cantoes honour right Vertue, & braue valour indeed: as 
noble Sir Philip Sidney and gentle Maister Spencer haue done, 
with immortall Fame ". . . . ^^ 

In the poetical works of tlie time their names are not 
often associated, and, even then, their relation is not re- 
membered as that of a celebrated friendship. Among the 
Verses Addressed to the AutJior prefixed to the Faerie 
Queene, there are some by W. L., which allege that Sidney 
persuaded Spenser to write the Faerie Queene in honor 
of Queen Elizabeth : 

" So Spenser was by Sidney's speaches wonne 
To blaze her fame, not fearing future harmes." 

Whether this was true we know not, but it is this kind of 
reference which has assisted imaginative writers in con- 
juring up these charming pictures of friendly intimacy. 
Yet after all, this, as well as other poetical allusions, not 
only indicates, but asserts, the connection of patron and 
poet.^^ Spenser certainly received great favors from the 

'^Foure Letters, etc., in WorTcs (Grosart), I, pp. 217-8. In the 
other places where he associates them, they appear only as famous 
poets of the age, cf. WorTcs, II, pp. 234, 266, and III, p. 50. 

" Cf. A Fastorall Mglogue upon the death of Sir Philip Sidney, 
Knight, etc., by Ludovic Bryskett (Globe ed. of Spenser, pp. 566-7), 



THE AREOPAGUS 257 

Sidney family and from the Earl of Leicester when they 
patronized his early work and procured him employment, 
and he enjoyed especially the favorable notice of young 
Philip, whose tastes led him to discuss literary projects with 
this poet who was striving to improve his position in life. 
So much is certain, but that Philip ever accepted him as an 
intimate friend, one with whom he acted upon terms of 
perfect equality, is an unwarranted conclusion. Undoubt- 
edly * ' Spenser 's admiration for that bright but short career 
was strong and lasting ",^^ but he has himself left on record 
the light in which he regarded, after a retrospect of ten 
years, his relation to Philip Sidney, — i. e. "the Patron of 
my young Muses ".^^ 

V. The Shepherd's Calender and the Areopagus 

During the last forty years a theory has received cur- 
rency that Spenser, Sidney, Dyer, Fulke Greville, Harvey, 
and perhaps others^ formed a literary club for the purpose 
of reforming English poetry, which they called the Areo- 
pagus. Although all information which is supposed to 
vouch for the existence of this society is agreed to lie solely 
in the five Harvey-Spenser letters written in the years 1579- 
80, the Shepherd's Calender and its gloss have been used 
to furnish many of the conjectured literary canons of these 
reformers, and, in one case, to exhibit a parallelism of pro- 
gram between this coterie and the French Pleiade of 

11. 141-2; also An Eclogue: made long since upon the death of Sir 
Philip Sidney by A. W. (published in Davison's Poetical Rhapsody, 
ed. Bullen, I, pp. 63-71), 11. 135-9. 

" Dean Church, p. 159. 

^ Cf. dedication of The Buines of Time. 

^ Kirke, Drant {Diet. Nat. Biog., article Spenser), and Leicester 
(Maynadier, Mod. Lang. Bev., TV, p. 293) have been suggested. 

18 



258 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Ronsard and Du Bellay.^ "Whether this poem is entitled to 
be reckoned a part of the program of the Areopagus,^ 
and therefore an expression of the critical opinions of 
Sidney, is a matter which calls for more detailed analysis 
than has yet been given it. This investigation in the first 
place requires a discussion of the exact nature of the 
Areopagus. 

The five letters which passed between Harvey and Spen- 
ser, three of which were published in June, 1580, and the 
two remaining somewhat later in the year, were avowedly 
concerned with "English refourmed Versifying", as their 
titles indicate. In the description of this scheme to estab- 
lish classical metres in English poetry, with which the cor- 
respondents connected the names of Philip Sidney and 
Edward Dyer, the title Areopagus twice appeared, men- 
tioned once by Spenser and once by Harvey.* While the 
earlier, as well as many of the later, biographers of Spen- 
ser and Sidney noticed the project in question, they have 
failed to recognize the Areopagus as a literary club.' 
Apparently the first conception of the Areopagus as an 
intellectual society which centred around Sidney and Spen- 
ser arose soon after 1870, In his edition of the Complete 
Poems of Sir Philip Sidney (1877) Dr. Grosart briefly 
mentioned the Areopagus, "wherein Gabriel Harvey, Sir 

'Professor J. B. Fletcher, Areopagus and Pleiade, in Journal of 
Germanic Philology (1898), II, pp. 429-53. 

' The name Areopagus is used simply as a convenient symbol for 
that literary coterie of which Sidney seems to have been the guiding 
spirit, not because there is any evidence that he and his friends used 
the word for that purpose. 

* Harvey, Worlds (Grosart), I, pp. 7 and 20. 

"Masterman (ed. Pickering, 1825), I, p. xi; Mitford (1839), I, 
pp. ix-x; Craik (1845), I, pp. 20-1; Hart (1847), pp. 34-5; Child 
(1855), I, p. xxi; GilfiUan (1859), II, p. xiv; ColUer (1862), I, pp. 
xxiv-v; Hales (1869), pp. xxvii-ix; Lowell (1875), IV, pp. 277-8; 
Grosart (1882-4), I, p. 70. 



THE AREOPAGUS 259 

Edward Dyer, Fulke Greville, Lord Brooke, Sidney and 
Spenser, sought to found a new school of poetry".® The 
same writer, however, in his copious life of Spenser omitted 
any reference to the Areopagus. Dean Church (1879) 
twice alluded briefly to Sidney's Areopagus, although he 
failed to connect it with any project other than the in- 
troduction of classical metres^ In much the same way Mrs. 
Humphrey Ward (1880) called the coterie Harvey's Areo- 
pagus.^ The earliest statement of the current theory of 
the Areopagus as a literary club devoted to the reforma- 
tion of English poetry which I have been able to find ap- 
peared from the pen of J. A. Symonds. Speaking of it as 
*'a little academy, formed apparently upon the Italian 
model", he went on to say that "its critical tendency was j 
indicated by the name Areopagus, given it perhaps in fun ' 
by Spenser; and its practical object was the reformation of i 
English poetry upon Italian and classical principles".^ He / 
also remarked that "no member of the club applied its 
doctrines so thoroughly in practice as Sidney", whose 
Arcadia poems in various metres "form the most solid 
residuum from the exercises of the Areopagus". Sidney's 
best biographer, H. R. Fox Bourne, has vigorously seconded 
this theory. "The Areopagus," he has said, "was a sort of 
club, composed mainly of courtiers, who aspired to be also 
men of letters, apparently with Sidney as its president, to 
which were admitted other men of letters, Spenser in par- 
ticular, who hardly aspired to rank with the courtiers."^" 
Sidney's Lady of May (1578), various poems of Dyer, and 
Greville 's "ponderous tragedies", he considered a part of 
the program of the club. After inferring its opposition 

' I, p. Ixxv. 

^ Spenser, pp. 24, 29. 

« Cf. T. H. Ward, The English Poets, I, pp. 343-4, 368. 
* Life of Sidney (Eng. Men of Letters Series), pp. 73-4. 
^^ Sir Philip Sidney, p. 200. 



260 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

to the clique of poets who "centred around the Earl of 
Oxford "^^ he reached the conclusion that "at no time was 
imitation of classical measures other than a pastime either 
to Sidney or to Spenser ".^^ In another place he character- 
ized the purpose of Sidney's Apologie for Poetrie as fol- 
lows: "his eloquent and humorous treatise was in reality 
as much a challenge to his friends of the Areopagus and 
others to give dignity to the poet's calling as a defence of 
poetry against such ribald, but not wholly unmerited, 
attacks as Stephen Gosson had lately made in The School 
of Abuse' \^^ 

From this time the theory of the Areopagus as an organ- 
ized literary society has received a pretty wide accept- 
ance, and has been stated in essays which relate to Sidney, 
Spenser, Fulke Greville, Dyer, and Harvey.^* At the same 
time, however, there are other writers who give little credit 
to this lately evolved opinion. Of these, Mr. Jusserand is 
entitled to speak with the most authority,^^ and Dr. Howard 
Maynadier has written perhaps the most vigorous article 
in opposition.^® 

The view that the Calender may be regarded as a part 
of the literary program of this club, although stated 
more than once,^'^ has been pushed furthest by Professor 
J. B. Fletcher in an essay on the Areopagus and the 
Pleiade. That many of the critical doctrines of the French 

" lUd., p. 201. 

"7fet<?., p. 203. 

''Sir Philip Sidney, p. 257. 

" The articles on these men in the Bid. Nat. Biog. are good ex- 
amples of the critical opinion which upholds the theory of an organ- 
ized literary club with definite membership, meetings, and program. 

^° A Literary History of the English People, II, pp. 355-7, note 2. 

"Mod. Lang. Eev. (1909), IV, pp. 289-301: The Areopagus of 
Sidney and Spenser. 

" J. W. Mackail in The Springs of Helicon, p. 83, for instance, 
expresses this opinion. 



THE AREOPAGUS 261 

poets of the latter school are put into practice in the 
Shepherd's Calender and are reflected in the gloss, he has 
shown strong reason for believing. In fact, one might 
call this relation definitely established. On the other hand, 
the theory that the Shepherd's Calender is to be regarded 
as a presentation of the views of the Areopagus is less 
certain. At any rate, room remains for other opinions of 
the influences which brought about the publication of this 
poem, and these I shall endeavor to indicate in the course 
of a consideration of Professor Fletcher's theory. 

A statement of my theory of Spenser's motives in writing 
the Calender, however, must introduce this discussion. In 
the first place, he desired to achieve poetic fame, to be a 
second Virgil (c/. Oct. eel.). Side by side with this is the 
wish to please his patrons, Leicester and Sidney, a purpose 
indicated by the Puritan attacks against the Anglican 
clergy and by the personal celebration of Leicester and one 
of his family (c/. Oct. and Nov. eel.). These aims bear 
witness that the publication of the poem was influenced by 
the poet's connection with Leicester and Sidney and by a 
desire to express personal and political sentiments accept- 
able to them. Doubtlessly several of the literary innova- 
tions therein recommended or practiced found parallels in 
the views of Sidney and his courtier-friends, but that the 
poem and its gloss may be considered to advocate literary 
principles which this circle alone entertained at that time, 
and which Spenser would not have published if he had 
not known Sidney and the rest, is a matter of doubt. 

Professor Fletcher, while acknowledging that "the only 
business of the club directly dwelt on between Harvey and 
Spenser^^ is the experimentation with classical metres" (p. 
430) justly remarks that "it is certainly hard to conceive 
the authors of the Shepherd's Calender and the Faerie 

^' In their correspondence. 



262 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Queene, of the Defense of Poesie and the Arcadia, in the 
very years in which those works were being planned and 
executed, finding no more fruitful basis for conversation 
and cooperation than the 'Dranting' of English verse" (pp. 
430-1). He then proceeds to identify the critical opinions 
of Sidney and Spenser as the expression of one school 
through the medium of the former's Defense or Apologie 
and of the latter 's treatise, The English Poete, mentioned 
by E. K. in the October ''argument" of the Calender, The 
only known topic, but undoubtedly the principal one, dis- 
cussed by Spenser in this lost work was the Platonic con- 
ception of the poet's vocation. E. K. expressed the opinion 
that poetry is ' ' rather no arte, but a divine gift and heavenly 
instinct not to bee gotten by laboure and learning, but 
adorned with both; and poured into the witte by a certain 
'Ev9ovcna(Tfios and celestiall inspiration, as the Author hereof 
elsewhere at large discourseth in his booke called The Eng- 
lish Poete, which booke being lately come to my hands, I 
mynde ... to publish". 

Professor Fletcher, after stating that ' ' this bardic notion 
of the poet is Sidney's major premiss" (p. 431), sums up 
the relation of the two treatises. "The simultaneous 
enunciation of a root principle of their art not currently 
accepted in their time and place by two friends known to 
be leaders of a literary reform-club can hardly be regarded 
as other than concerted action" (pp. 431-2). This theory, 
of course, depends upon the hypothesis that at the time 
E. K. referred to The English Poete, presumably no later 
than April 10, 1579,^^ the Areopagus had existed for sev- 

** The addition of the August sestina unaccompanied by a gloss 
indicates that Spenser added to the poem after E. K. had completed 
the gloss. E. K. 's intention of publishing The English Poete also 
shows pretty clearly that Spenser could not have written the October 
"argument". On April 10, 1579, E. K. submitted his gloss to 
Harvey, and I do not believe that he subsequently altered it. 



THE AREOPAGUS 263 

eral months at least; otherwise, the two poets could have 
had no opportunity to construct their critical platform. 
Of course, it is entirely possible that Sidney may have had 
Spenser "in some use of familiarity" during the winter 
of 1578-9, yet this allusion to the extent of their acquaint- 
ance appears in Spenser's letter of October 5 (16), when 
it is evidently applied to a condition of affairs previously 
unknown to Harvey. Even, therefore, if the Areopagus 
is considered a literary club, organized to the extent of 
holding meetings at Leicester House, its organization could 
hardly have reached a point which would warrant a pro- 
mulgation of a considerable part of its platform in April, 
1579. In other words, it can be shown that Spenser's trea- 
tise may have been the result of influences outside of the 
Sidney circle. 

The influences to which I refer may well have arisen 
from the contemporaneous study of Plato in the University 
of Cambridge. Ascham has testified that Plato began to be 
studied there about 1540,^° with the result that the new 
statutes of Edward VI (1549) prescribed his writings as 
a part of the curriculum.-^ In his letter of April 7, 1580, 
Harvey mentions the general estimation in which Plato's 
works were then held in Cambridge.^- Not only Spenser 
and Kirke, but many other Cambridge scholars, must there- 
fore have been thoroughly acquainted with the Platonic 
theory of the function of the poet, and it is in this way pos- 
sible to account for the influence which induced Spenser 
to compose a treatise on this subject. 

The "bardic notion of a poet", while "not currently 
acccepted" in England about the year 1580, had neverthe- 
less been broached in two critical treatises, one of which 

" Mullmger, I, p. 52. 

«• Ibid., p. 110. 

'^ WorTcs (Grosart), I, p. 69. 



264: SPENSER 's ''shepherd's calender" 

appeared a few years before E. K. referred to The English 
Poete, and the other^^ certainly before the composition of 
Sidney's discourse. In 1567 Thomas Drant's translation 
of the Ars Poetica of Horace appeared, a work in which 
the divine origin of poetry is noticed : 

" Silvestres homines sacer interpresque deorum 
Caedihus et victu foedo deter ruit Orpheus, 
Dictus oh hoc lenire tigres rabidosque leones. 

Sic honor et nomen divinis vatihus atque 
Carminihus venit." 

(11. 391^01) 

This is a succinct statement of the bardic function of 
the poet — sacer interpresque deorum — and of the divine 
nature of poetry — divinis vatihus atque carminihus, — 
which had been circulated in English through the transla- 
tion. Probably in 1580, perhaps at the end of the previous 
year, Thomas Lodge set forth his Reply to Stephen Gosson 's 
Schoole of Abuse. In spite of the fact that it has been char- 
acterized as " a production of the old inflated type, without 
a touch of modern freshness, full of pompous and only too 
probably spurious allusions to the classics",^* the same 
Platonic conception of the poet's calling is asserted more 
than once : 

'' Poeta nascitur, orator fit as who should say, Poetrye eom- 
meth from above from a heavenly seate of a glorious God unto 
an excellent creature man."^^ 

" Perseus was made a poete divine furore percitus and 
whereas the poets were sayde to call for the Muses helpe ther 

^ Although The English Poete probably preceded this second treatise 
in date of composition, it was strictly withheld from publication. 

^ Cf. The Complete Works of Thomas Lodge (Hunterian Club), 
memoir by E. W. Gosse, p. 7. 

« Op. cit., I, p. 13. 



THE AREOPAGUS 265 

mening was no other as lodoeus Badius^^ reporteth, but to call for 
heavenly inspiration from above to direct theyr endedevors " 
(i. e. endeavors)." 

'* I would make a long discourse unto you of Platoes 4 furies, 
ete."28 

These critics, therefore, had enunciated the Platonic theory 
of poetry before, or at the very same time that, Spenser and 
Sidney were holding their informal discussions, and, in 
addition, they published their treatises, whereas Spenser's 
never reached the press,-°and Sidney's appeared only post- 
humously in 1595, though it probably circulated in manu- 
script soon after its composition (circ. 1581).^° Not only 
Spenser and Sidney, but other writers also, by 1580 or 
thereabouts had presented the Platonic idea of the poet's 
vocation, which the Italian and French critics of the Renais- 
sance had sedulously proclaimed. This part of Professor 
Fletcher's argument, therefore, does not necessarily dis- 
tinguish Spenser and Sidney from other innovators at this 
time, if one regards the Areopagus as a somewhat loosely 
organized society unwilling to publish its treatises on 
poetry. 

In his skilfully executed argument to exhibit the paral- 
lelism in program between the Areopagus and the Pleiade 
Professor Fletcher drag's upon the Shepherd's Calender, 
as well as other poems of Spenser and the writings of 
Sidney. While I repeat that the works of these two men 
taken together certainly seem to strive after the same 
aims as the French school, it is my endeavor to show that 

** The commentator of Mantuan 's eclogues. 

" Op. cit., I, p. 14. 

« Ibid. 

^Webbe, writing in 1586, who shows a familiarity with the 
Shepherd's Calender, wishes its author would let his "English Poet 
come abroad" (Haslewood, p. 37). 

^ Ed. Collins, p. xxiii. 



266 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

the actual literary innovations in the Shepherd's Calender 
and the critical opinions therein declared by E. K. are in 
large part either at variance, or cannot be proved to coin- 
cide, with the practice and views of Sidney, and that it is 
therefore unsafe to consider this poem as the manifesto of 
the Areopagus. 

The first point in Professor Fletcher's theory relates to 
the imitation of the classics : " it is clear that both Du Bel- 
lay 's Deffence and Sidney's Defense mediate in like manner 
between the friends and the opponents of classical imitation 
by a similar distinction between literal and what they both 
indicate as 'digestive' imitation" (p. 433).^^ The examples 
given from both works testify to the truth of this similarity 
in aim. How is this theory, which is a corollary to the 
bardie notion of a poet,^^ illustrated in the Shepherd's 
Calender? A close imitation of classical or Renaissance 
writers — a paraphrase in places — is made in the March, 
July, October, November, and December eclogues. The first 
is an imitation of the theme of Bion's idyl (iv). The Boy 
and Love, the second and third of two eclogues of Man- 
tuan, where paraphrases of the original occur, and the 
two last of Marot — De Mme. Loyse and the Eglogue au 
Boy — in which slavish transcription is somewhat prac- 
ticed. On the other hand, the January, June, and August 
eclogues, although the influences of Theocritus and Virgil 
are apparent, have devoured the "figures and phrases" of 
their originals, making them "wholly theirs ".^^ This use 

** This is precisely the theory of Horace, Ars Foetica, 11. 408-14, 
which Drant had translated (1567). Drant died before April 17, 
1578, and therefore could hardly have been a member of the Areo- 
pagus as some have stated (cf. Diet. Nat. Biog.). 

^^ ' ' The Slavish imitation of the humanist, however, depended upon 
a more vital misconception than of mere literary methods. He forgot 
that before the poet can imitate or do anything else, the poet must be ; 
and that no recipe save God's can make him". (P. 434.) 

^* Sidney, Apologie (Collins), p. 57, quoted by Mr. Fletcher, p. 433. 



THE AREOPAGUS 267 

of models has been noticed by E. K. in his list of poets, 
classic as well as Eenaissance, "whose foting this Author 
every where f olloweth ".^* At the same time, Spenser has 
also applied this scheme of assimilative imitation to Chaucer 
in three of his eclogues, the February, May, and September. 
Now Sidney, in spite of his warm defence of his own tongue 
— "for the uttering sweetly and properly the conceits of the 
minde, . . . that hath it equally with any other tongue in 
the world "^^ — recommended neither by practice nor by 
dogma the application of this principle to native poets. 
His poetry, as well as his prose work,^® is imitative only of 
classic or foreign models. Like Du Bellay^^ he did not 
advocate the imitation of native poets, although he admired 
Chaucer (p. 51). While Sidney and Spenser, as well as 
many other poets of that age, notably the amorists and son- 
neteers, generally agreed in an assimilation or transforma- 
tion of classic and foreign models into English poetry, these 
two differed in the application of this principle to their 
national predecessors. 

The next parallel which Professor Fletcher draws be- 
tween the doctrines of the Areopagus and of the Pleiade 
relates to the new "poetic diction" which it was the chief 
purpose of Du Bellay's Deffence, as well as of E. K.'s 

** The Epistle (ed. Herford), p. 7. 

" Op. cit., p. 59. 

" Sidney probably considered his Arcadia in large part a poem : 
"I speak to shew that it is not riming and versing that maketh a 
Poet, no more than a long gowne maketh an Advocate . . . But it is 
that fayning notable images of vertues, vices, or what els, with that 
delightfull teaching," etc. (p. 12). Cf. also p. 36. 

'^ Oeuvres (ed. Marty-Laveaux), p. 33: "De tons les anciens Poetes 
Francoys, quasi un seul, Guillaume du Lauris, et Ian de Meun, sont 
dignes d'estre leuz, non tant pour ce qu'il y ait en eux beaucoup de 
choses, qui se doynent immiter des Modernes, comme pour y voir quasi 
eonune une premiere Imaige de la langue Praneoyse, venerable pour 
son antiquite" (Deffence, L. II, ch. 2). 



268 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Epistle prefixed to the Shepherd's Calender, to "defend 
and define" (p. 436). "Poetic diction and humanist dic- 
tion both were partly right; their common fault was one- 
sidedness. Poetic diction must not be either all home-bred, 
or all learned, but both in due proportion. The literary 
vocabulary was to be enriched (illustre) by an equitable 
addition from both classes of terms. 'Home-spun' revivals 
were to include (1) archaisms, and (2) dialectical terms 
and phrases; 'learned' accretions were to come from (1) 
naturalized importations from foreign tongues, ancient and 
modern, (2) technical terms from the arts and sciences, and 
(3) new coinages"^® (pp. 436-7). 

The very advocation of this new "poetic diction", how- 
ever, implied that the state of poets and their art needed a 
rehabilitation. Accordingly, we find Sidney and Spenser, in 
company with Du Bellay, lamenting the base condition of 
poetry.^® This idea, therefore, forms a parallel between 
Sidney and Spenser, as well as between the two circles of 
French and English poets. At the same time, it appeared 
too commonly in the writings of the period to be regarded 
as the exclusive property of any particular set of poets or 
critics. Even Gosson in The School of Abuse lamented 

''Professor Fletcher's note to this passage runs as follows: — "It is 
obviously impossible to prove in detail this analysis of the new diction. 
It can at most illustrate it. For the Pleiade, see Pellisier in Petit de 
Julleville, Hist, de la Langue et de la Litt. Franc, T. Ill, ch. iv; 
also La Pleiade Francoyse, ed. Marty-Laveaux : appendices. For 
the Areop., C. H. Herford, ed. STiep. Cal., introd., iv; A. S. Cook, 
ed. Defense of Poesy : introd., § 4, But a full study of Spenser 's 
language and grammar is still a desideratum." The last statement 
is still true. 

=° Sidney, Apologie (Collins), pp. 48-50 (cited by Mr. Fletcher), 
cf. also pp. 2, 7; Spenser, Shep. Cal., Oct. eel., especially 11. 67-84 
(Mr. Fletcher cites The Teares of the Muses, 11. 559-70) ; Du Bellay, 
Deffence, Livre II, chap, xi (cited by Mr. Fletcher). 



THE AREOPAGUS 269 

the miserable condition of poetry,*" although he had 
nothing to recommend for its improvement beyond the 
driving out of present evils. 

Since poetry has become "prophaned ... of the base 
vulgar", as Sidney and Spenser lament, they desire to 
elevate it and to make it worthy of the regard of princes 
and noblemen. "It is clear," therefore, "that the gospel 
of the New Poetry was limited to Gentlemen and 
Scholars,"*^ or, in other words, the new poets, like Milton 
and Wordsworth, sought a " fit audience, though few ' '. In 
Spenser's farewell admonition to his "booke", 

" The better please, the worse despise ; I aske no more," 

we get a concise statement of this theory, w^hich he has 
carried out in the celebration of Queen Elizabeth, Leicester, 
Grindal, and other actual or hoped for patrons. Likewise, 
Sidney has enumerated many kings and famous men who 
honored poets and poetry, regretting that they "should 
only finde in our time a hard welcome in England".*^ 

Turning to Professor Fletcher's classification of the new 
* ' poetic diction ' ' we find that the first sub-division of ' ' home- 
spun" revived words is composed of archaisms. He has 
noticed that Sidney and Spenser differed upon this subject in 
much the same manner as Du Bellayand Ronsard (p. 438). 
E. K.'s Epistle defends this use of archaism, just as the 
Calender illustrates it in the passage beginning: "in my 
opinion it is one special prayse of many, whych are dew to 
this Poete, that he hath laboured to restore, as to theyre 
rightfuU heritage, such good and naturall English words, 
as have been long time out of use, and almost cleane dis- 
herited".*^ In the Apologie Sidney did not advocate the 

*" In Early Treatises on the Stage, XV, p. 15. A similar idea is 
found in Lodge's Beply, pp. 19-21, in Worlcs, I (ed. Hunt. Club). 
*' Professor Fletcherj pp. 437-8. 
"Op. cit., p. 48. 
*• Mr. Fletcher cites the whole of this passage. 



270 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

pursuance of this device, neither did he adopt it to any 
extent in his poetry.** His criticism of Spenser's poem — 
"that same framing of his stile to an old rustick language 
I dare notalowe" (p. 51) — to which Professor Fletcher has 
pointed, when taken with his application of pastoral art, 
probably denotes an opposition to both rustic and antique 
words. On the question of archaism, therefore, which 
forms so large a part of the Calender's contribution to the 
New Poetry, Spenser and Sidney disagreed. 

Likewise on the use of "terms and phrases from provin- 
cial dialects" Spenser and Sidney were at variance. This 
divergence of opinion, which Professor Fletcher has noted 
as a parallel to the opposite views of Ronsard and Du 
Bellay, is shown by Spenser's employment of dialect in the 
Calender for "Doric" rusticity and by Sidney's censure of 
it in the passage just quoted. 

The second division — "learned" accretions — is composed 
of "(1) naturalized, (2) technical, (3) newly coined" 
terms or phrases.*^ This classification is founded upon 
"the explicit prescriptions of Du Bellay and Ronsard", 
and it is true that these kinds of words "abound in the 
diction" of Sidney and Spenser. At the same time, al- 
though undoubtedly present, they do not abound in the 
Shepherd's Calender. Herford's introduction to this poem 

** Professor Fletclier remarks: "certainly in both Ms (Sidney's) and 
Du Bellay 's works there is evident archaism" (p. 438). Though this 
is true, Sidney's archaism is kept pretty well in the background. His 
pastoral poems — the two pastorals which appeared in Davison's Poet- 
ical Bhapsody, the Dialogue between Two Shepherds, and the poems 
in the Arcadia, — in which his use of archaisms might be expected to 
be illustrated, have nothing in common with the Shepherd's Calender. 
Such words as prest (ready), liveth (lieveth), sneT), nould, defaste, 
and the phrase I con thee thanTce, are about the only examples. His 
pastoral poetry, even in such pieces as Geron and Mastix, is devoid 
of rusticity. 

" Fletcher, op. cit., p. 440. 



THE ABEOPAGUS 271 

contains a discussion of its language which, while not pro- 
fessing to be complete, is pretty thorough in regard to certain 
classes of words. Of the first class noted above Herford 
enumerates four words, one*^ of which, however, had been 
circulating in English for a long time ; the others are : 
crumenall (ix, 119), overture (vii, 28), and stanch (ix, 47), 
all of which are shown to be unfamiliar by E. K. 's glosses. 
The derivation of the first, which comes from the Latin 
crumena, and of the second, from the Italian stanco, E. K. 
does not notice, while he records that overture ' ' is borrowed 
of the French". To this list equipage (Fr. equipage) ," 
Melampode (Lat. melampodion, taken from the Gr.), 
Tamburins*^ (probably from Ital. tamhurino) , scanne (Lat. 
scandere), and entrailed (0. F. entreillier) may be added.*^ 
Although the two latter terms had been used previously in 
England, Spenser gave them a new meaning due to his deri- 
vation. Under technical terms, c/iam/ere^Z (ii, 43),^" as Mr. 
Fletcher notices, may be given as an example. The same 
gentleman cites other instances of this transferred use of 
words in Spenser, but none are taken from the Calender, 
Herford has not attempted any such classification in his 

*'^ Floivre Delice (iv, 1. 144) was used by Dunbar (1503) in The 
Thistle and The Bose (1. 138), and the New English Dictionary cites 
previous examples. In the Faerie Queene (II, vi, 16) Spenser has 
flowre-deluce, which E.K. considers a misusage. 

*' Murray cites an example of the military use of this word also 
in 1579. 

** E.K. 's vague identification of this instrument with the clarion 
bespeaks the newness of the word. 

*^ Graseth (ix, 113), perhaps from Latin grassari = to go about, 
to go rioting about, to rage, — may belong here. Also Oten as applied 
to reedes (x, 8) may owe its meaning to the Lat. avena, eharme (x, 
118) its meaning to the Lat. carmen, and tinct (xi, 107) its form to 
the Lat. tinctus. These words had all been used before in English 
in allied senses. 

"" Its technical use is given in Cooper, Thesaurus, Striatus (1565-73), 
cf. N. E. D. 



272 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

discussion of the language of the Calender. With the 
help of the New English Dictionary, however, I offer the 
following examples: spring (vi, 53), shole (v, 20), cosset 
(xi, 46, 206,) 51 and weanell wast (ix, 198).^2 ^^ any rate, 
E. K. by his glosses shows that he thought the first two 
words were technical, but the two latter may well have been 
dialectical. Murray also gives no figurative use of pyneons 
(x, 87) before Spenser, which had previously been applied 
to the terminal segment of a bird's wing, and then to the 
wing itself.'*^ Other words, such as maskedst (i, 24), rovde 
(viii, 79), pricke (ix, 122), tenor (x, 50), and checkmate 
(xii, 53), although once used technically, had come by 
Spenser's time to be regularly applied to ordinary matters. 
''New-coinages are ticklish things to pronounce on," as 
Mr. Fletcher remarks, but Herford has shown the way, and 
the New English Dictionary is a pretty reliable authority. 
With the help of these guides the following examples from 
the Calender may be given: beastlyhead (v, 265), dreeri- 
ment (xi, 36), embrave (ii, 109), forhaile (ix, 243), forsay, 
forsayd (v, 82; vii, 69), headlesse hood (ii, 86), overgrast 
(ix, 130), and merimake (v, 15; xi, 9)." Forsay and 
forsayd are not glossed and may therefore have been dia- 
lectical in Spenser's time. For cheriping = chirruping 

^^ No examples of this word occur between the Domesday BooJc and 
Spenser (Murray). 

"E. K. uses somd (p. 7, 1. 29) ^summed, full-fledged, and prin- 
cipals (p. 7, 1. 34) = the two longest feathers in the wings of a hawk, 
which are technical terms transferred from falconry. 

^ Enstalled (xi, 177), generally spelled installed, had enjoyed at 
first only the restricted meaning of investing with an office or dignity 
by seating in a stall or official seat. Its transferred meaning of 
merely putting or placing in a particular position or place began 
to appear about 1580. Spenser seems to keep a part of the first 
meaning, and the term might therefore be considered quasi-technical. 

^ Derring-doe (x, 1. 65) had been previously used by Lydgate as a 
quasi-compound (Chron. Troy), noticed by Herford (p. 199). 



THE AREOPAGUS 273 

(vi, 55), froivie = musty (vii, 111), mazie (xii, 25), 
wightly = swiftly (ix, 5), state = stoutly (ix, 45), under- 
saye=:to affirm in contradiction to anyone (ix, 91), vetchy 
(ix, 256), wexen = of wax (xii, 68), weedy e (xii, 122), 
wrigle = wriggling (ii, 7), wit eless = blameless (viii, 136), 
the grosse = the whole (ix, 135), haske = fish-basket (xi, 
16), no previous examples have been found, but they were 
all probably colloquial or taken from dialects.^^ In addi- 
tion, there are certain words which Spenser uses with a 
meaning slightly different from the common, such as 
enchased = engraved, instead of adorned with figures in 
relief (viii, 7), goodlihead = aip^lied to the person instead 
of the quality (ii, 184; v, 270), Zceepe = applied to the 
objects looked after, instead of to the looking after (vii, 
133), and greete = mourning, as applied to dress, instead 
of weeping, lamentation (viii, 66). Herford has also 
classified as anomalies in Spenser's language certain new 
uses or forms due to grammatical and etymological 
blunders. This writer remarks that "some of his most 
singular blunders had been made before him" (p. Ivii), 
and that they are due to his misconception of pas- 
sages couched in the Middle English of earlier writers. 
Undoubtedly many of them, such as renne (viii, 3) =used 
as past participle instead of as present indicative, yede 
(vii, 109) =used as infinitive and present indicative in- 
stead of as preterite, and gride (ii, 4) = spelled thus, in- 
stead of gerde, were consciously made to give rusticity to 
his language, an effect against which Sidney recorded his 
objection. 

Such is the amount and such is the scope of the 
"learned" accretions in the Calender, and it is, of course, 
evident that they are greatly in the minority in comparison 

"C/. Wright, Engl. Dial. Diet., where several of these are con- 
tained. Frowie, mazie, wightly, state, vetchy, witeless, the grosse, 
and hasJce are glossed by E, K. 
19 



274 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

with the "home-spun" revivals. In fact E. K., with whom 
Spenser probably more nearly agreed at this time than he 
would have later in life, has let it be understood that the 
introduction of foreign words, at any rate, formed no part 
of Spenser's program.^^ It is not in the Calender, where 
the use of archaisms is required to provide a rustic atmos- 
phere, but in the courtly descriptions of the Faerie Queene, 
that Spenser's "learned" accretions abound. 

In regard to the elevation of the syntax, the next parallel 
which Mr. Fletcher draws between the Areopagus and 
the Pleiade, E. K. has this to say: "for the knitting of 
sentences, whych they call the joynts and members thereof, 
and for al the compasse of the speach, it is round without 
roughnesse, and learned without hardnes, such indeed as 
may be perceived of the leaste, understoode of the moste, 
but judged onely of the learned". This difference or im- 
provement is determined by a comparison with the work of 
preceding or contemporary ' ' rymers ' ' ; indeed the advance 
in syntax from that employed by men like Skelton, Surrey, 
Wyatt, Grimald, Turbervile, Googe, and others, is notice- 
able. At the same time, however, "the syntax of the 
Shepherd's Calender is, in comparison with the vocabulary, 
but slightly removed from that of contemporary verse ".^^ 
Now, while Sidney and Spenser were certainly both inno- 
vators in the use of syntax, the kind of innovation in this 
respect employed in the Calender differs a good deal, for 
instance, from that in the pastoral songs of the Arcadia. 
A separate work might indeed be written on this point, 
which is beyond the scope of the present essay. In gen- 
eral, however, I will hazard the opinion that the degree of 
difference in syntax from that in common use found in the 
Calender and in Sidney's pastoral poems varies in pro- 

'''The Epistle (ed. Herford), pp. 5-6. 
" Herf ord, Introd., p. lix. 



THE AREOPAGUS 275 

portion to the degree of rusticity present in these poems of 
each, and as regards the use of rusticity the difference, both 
in the opinion and in the practice of the two poets, was at 
this time {circa 1580) considerable. 

In reference to syntactic advantages of the English lan- 
guage Sidney made it clear what he had chiefly in mind: 
"for the uttering sweetly and properly the conceits of the 
minde, which is the end of speech, that hath it equally mth 
any other tongue in the world : and is particularly happy 
in compositions of two or three words together . . . which 
is one of the greatest beauties can be in a language ".^^' 
"In the invention and use of compound terms," Mr. 
Fletcher remarks, "Sidney was rivalled only by Du 
Bartas" (p. 441). Professor Cook, in his edition of the 
Defense or Apologie, has given a list of fifty-four com- 
pounds found in this work alone (p. 130). "Many of 
these, ' ' he says, ' ' seem to be translated directly from Latin 
or Greek, rather than borrowed from the French." In 
the Calender compound terms are few, and, apart from 
those obviously intended for one word, as heecllesse hood 
(ii, 86) and lusty-head (v, 204), only five can be classified 
as new: well-thewed (ii, 96), neiv-hudded (v, 214), ^'^ fyerie- 
footed (vii, 18), sonne-hright (x, 72), and harvest-hope 
(xii, 121 ).^*' This poem, therefore, is rather behind-hand 
with this device, which Sidney has strongly advocated both 
by precept and example, although Spenser's later work is 
full of such compounds.®^ 

Two further suggestions in regard to syntax, intended to 
give "ampleness to opulence of style," Professor Fletcher 
has also included in the program of the Areopagus. 

^^ Apologie (ed. Collins), pp. 59-60. 

°° Sidney uses new-hudding, cf. Defense (ed. Cook) , p. 52, 1. 19, 
"" There are only about half a dozen others in the Calender, all of 
which were then in common use. 

'^ Professor Fletcher, op. cit., p. 442. 



276 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

These are (1) allusion, "especially classical," and (2) 
paraphrase. "The innovation here," he remarks, "is of 
course not of kind, but degree" (p. 443). Certainly these 
characteristics find a profuse illustration not only in the 
works of Sidney and Spenser, but also in those of their 
recent predecessors and of their contemporaries.*'^ Indeed 
Spenser's use of these prevalent stylistic devices of Renais- 
sance poetry and prose is much better illustrated in the 
Faerie Queene and his later works than in the Shepherd's 
Calender. In the latter, several eclogues give exceedingly 
few examples of classical allusion,^^ while several, it is true, 
are well fitted out with this piece of poetic mechanism.®* 
At the same time, the employment of paraphrase also 
becomes much more noticeable in the Faerie Queene, chiefly 
by reason of its stanza and its narrative form. "While, of 
course, this device is present in the Shepherd's Calender, 
just as it is in the poetry of Surrey, Wyatt, and Grimald, 
examples do not swarm upon every side. Spenser's habit 
of telling time by the firmament, which Lowell instances as 
"one leading characteristic" of his style, does not find a 
profuse illustration in the Calender.^^ Warton is the 
authority to whom Professor Fletcher refers (p. 444), and 
Warton 's remarks upon Spenser's "dilatation" are con- 

'- For conscious and copious use of classical and Biblical allusion 
several pieces in Tottel's Miscellany furnish examples (cf. ed. Arber, 
pp. 97, 98, 100, 103, 105, 137, 197). Grimald was especially strong 
on this device. 

*"I find three instances in the "January", three in the "August", 
four in the "May", two in the "September", and one in the 
"February". 

" The March, June, October, November, and December eclogues, and 
especially the April song, are pretty well provided with classical allu- 
sion. Biblical allusion receives exemplification in the "July". 

^ These seem to be the only examples : 1, 73-5 ; iii, 116-7 ; x, 3 ; 
xi, 13-16. Lowell draws his examples from the Faerie Queene (pp. 
330-1). 



THE AEEOPAGUS 277 

cerned only with the Spenserian stanza.^® On the other 
hand, Sidney 's use of these devices is too often attested both 
in his poetry and in his prose to require proof, ''^ and he, as 
well as Spenser and many other Elizabethan poets, enriched 
the style of their language in this respect. On this point 
my contention is that the Calender, perhaps owing to its 
rustic dress, does not make any great step in advance over 
some earlier poets of the sixteenth century in the degree of 
application of these devices. 

In regard to metrical innovation, whatever parallels 
may exist between the purposes of the Areopagus and 
the Pleiade, Sidney and Spenser seem to have diverged 
widely in their views. After all has been said and done, 
the fact remains that from October, 1579, until April, 1580, 
at any rate, the imitation of classical principles of versifica- 
tion formed the ostensibly chief business of the Areo- 
pagus.^^ Indeed, everything in the correspondence of 
Spenser and Harvey upon which the theory of this club's 
existence has been based is concerned with "our English 
refourmed Versifying ".^^ In October, 1579, Spenser 
announced what was a part of the program of Sidney's 
circle : 

^^Warton, Oiservaiions on The Faery Queen of Spenser (1807), 
pp. 158-9. 

*'C/. Professor Fletcher's remarks on this point (p. 444). 

^Professor Fletcher, who, to my mind, rightly argues that this 
part of the program of the Areopagus has been given undue impor- 
tance, remarks that "theoretically the members of the Areopagus 
seem to have discussed seriously offsetting 'balde rymes' by so-called 
classical metres in English. Practically, they never published a 
verse of the 'reformed versification' " (p. 446). That is true, if 
we do not consider Harvey a member, for specimens occur in his 
correspondence with Spenser which he published. At the same time, 
the Areopagus published neither of its so-called manifestos {The 
English Poete and the Apologie). 

*' Sub-title of the Three Proper . . . Letters, which, though of later 
composition, preceded in publication the remaining two. 



278 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" And nowe they have proclaimed in their dpetwirayo) a generall 
surceasing and silence of balde Rymers, and also of the verie 
beste to : in steade whereof, they have, by authoritie of their 
whole Senate, prescribed certaine Lawes and rules of Quantities 
of English sillables for English Verse : having had thereof already 
great practise, and drawen mee to their faction."™ 

This scheme for the "surceasing and silence of balde 
Rymers" has something in common with E. K. 's dictum: 

" I scorne and spue out the rakehellye route of our ragged 
rymers (for so themselves use to hunt the letter) which without 
learning boste, without judgement jangle, without reason rage and 
fome, as if some instinct of Poeticall spirite had newly ravished 
them above the meanenesse of common capacitie."" 

In regard to the Shepherd's Calender the significant part 
of all this is, not that Spenser failed to introduce classical 
metres into his poem, but that he still clung to certain 
"balde" rhymes. The July eclogue is couched in the 
native "fourteener", divided according to common prac- 
tice, the "March" is written in old-fashioned ballad metre, 
and the February, May, and September eclogues, together 
with most of the "August", employ the uneven accentual 
rhythm modelled upon what were then supposed to be 
Chaucer's methods.'^^ Though Sidney did not disapprove 
of rhyme when he wrote the Apologie, he probably dis- 
liked irregular native metres, such as the above, for he has 
left scarcely a specimen of his employment of them.'^^ 

On the other hand, the varied stanzaic metres of the 
other eclogues — the "January" and the "December", 

'"'Harvey, Works (Grosart), I, pp. 7-8. 

"The Epistle (Herford), p. 6. 

''^Cf. Thynne's edition of Chaucer (1542), which prescribes four 
accents for the reading of his verse, and also Gascoigne, Certayne 
Notes of Instruction concerning the making of Verse or Byrne in 
English (ed. Haslewood), pp. 5-7. This was published in 1575. 

" The Dialogue Between Two Shepherds uttered in a Pastoral 
Shotv at Wilto7i, written in fourteeners, is the only example. 



THE AREOPAGUS 279 

the "June" and the ''October", the ''April" and the 
"November" — certainly conveyed to Sidney that poetry 
which he found in the Calender. Such metrical effects 
Sidney probably had in mind when he commented upon 
the "Auncient" and "Moderne" systems of versification: 
"the latter (i. e. the 'Moderne') likewise, with hys Ryme, 
striketh a certain musick to the eare: and, in fine, sith 
it dooth delight, though by another way, it obtaines the 
same purpose: there being in eyther sweetnes, and want- 
ing in neither maiestie"J* It is possible, therefore, 
that in these latter eclogues, which deal with courtly 
subjects as opposed to the more rustic subjects of those 
couched in native metres, Sidney's influence was making 
itself felt upon Spenser. At the same time, however, even 
if we believe with Professor Fletcher that it is unintelligent 
to "limit the business of the Areopagus to its 'reformed 
versification' " (p. 446), we find a distinct difference in 
the opinion of the two poets in regard to metre at the time 
of the publication of the Calender. On the one hand, Spen- 
ser employs old-fashioned homely metres in the more rustic 
eclogues and imported, or remodelled Chaucerian,^' stan- 
zaic forms and rhythms in the more courtly ones, in a work 
published when Sidney was protesting against these 
"balde" rhymes, and when he was subordinating the kind 
of refined versification found in the latter sort to the graft- 
ing of classical metres on the English stock. After this 
short-lived craze for the "refourmed" versification had 
died out among the members of the Areopagus, Sidney and 
his friends undoubtedly sought to enrich English versifica- 
tion along the general lines of innovation suggested by 
Spenser. But the reason that the metres of the Calender 
cannot be considered to represent the program of this 

''*• Apologie (Collins), p. 60. 

" Cf. E. Legouis, op. cit. by Professor Fletcher, p. 445. 



280 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

school is that Sidney and his fellow Areopagites were at 
the very time of its publication advocating classical metres. 
That Spenser himself followed this fashion has generally 
been taken as an indication of his respect for Sidney, and 
not as proof of any serious belief in this scheme.'^® 

The concluding point in Professor Fletcher's article 
is concerned with the literary genres which the Areo- 
pagus recommended for imitation. In the present dis- 
cussion this portion of his argument need hardly be 
treated, for he implies that each member of the Areo- 
pagus illustrated the new program by essaying certain of 
the proposed forms, — i. e. Spenser's contributions were, 
among others, odes, eclogues, sonnets, and an epic ; Sidney 
attempted the masque, the religious hymn, the eclogue, the 
sonnet-sequence, and the pastoral romance, for instance; 
while Fulke Greville in addition essayed tragedy.'^^ 
Though both Sidney and Spenser cultivated the eclogue, 
it is evident from the works of Barclay, Googe, and Tur- 
bervile that this coincidence of practice gave no new 
genre to English poetry. 

With Professor Fletcher's conclusion, the similarity in 
the " quasi-propagandist organization" and in the "dis- 
tinct and innovating programme" (p. 452) of the Areo- 
pagus and the PlSiade, I agree heartily. At the same 
time, while clearly seeing that the reformations advocated 
by E. K. and those put in practice by Spenser find close 
parallels in the work of Du Bellay and Ronsard, I have 
attempted to show that these innovations are in many 
cases at variance with the literary tenets of Sidney, and I 

"C/. Masterman (1825), I, p. xi; Craik (1845), I, pp. 20-1; Hart 
(1847), pp. 34-5; Gilfillan (1859), II, p. xiv; Lowell (18'75), IV, pp. 
277-8. Fox Bourne (pp. 201-3) and Professor Fletcher (p. 446) 
also do not take Spenser's interest in classical metres as evidence of a 
serious purpose. 

" Cf. Fox Bourne, p. 200. 



THE AREOPAGUS 281 

cannot therefore regard the Calender as representing ' ' the 
views and enthusiasm ' '^^ of any organization over which the 
latter presided. Whether one looks upon the Areopagus 
as a club devoted to general literary reform with Profes- 
sor Fletcher (p. 432), or whether one accepts the extreme 
contrary opinion of Dr. Maynadier, that the "existence of 
a literary club with definite membership, known as the 
Areopagus, is doubtful' V^ the fact remains that the com- 
bined literary innovations of Sidney and Spenser bear cer- 
tain striking resemblances to those of the Pleiade. At the 
same time, the Shepherd's Calender, although is is dedi- 
cated to Sidney, and although it undertakes certain con- 
scious reforms analogous to those of the Pleiade, either 
attempted changes of which Sidney deliberately disap- 
proved, as in the case of its archaisms and rusticity, and, 
in part, in the case of its metres, or else failed to advocate 
duly other reforms which Sidney recommended, as in the 
case of the use of "learned" accretions and of digestive 
methods of classical imitation. In regard to the advocation 
of other changes in the criticism of their art, such as that 
which regarded the poet as a bard or vates, Johnson's 
remark on Dryden might be applied, that, if they changed, 
they changed with the nation. Not only had Plato been 
studied at Cambridge for upwards of forty years before 
1579, but other critics besides Sidney, Spenser, and E. 
K., — i. e. Drant and Lodge, — were using his writings 
as authority for their opinions. A Discourse of English 
Poetrie (1586) by William Webbe, who shows no famil- 
iarity with the work of Sidney,^** although he is prolific in 
his mention of contemporaneous writers, also sets forth the 

'* Mackail, The Springs of Helicon, p. 83. 

" Op. cit., p. 301. 

*" Cf. G. Wyndham, Bonsard and La t'leiade, pp. 55-6. 



282 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Platonic theory of the poet 's art.^^ This has been described 
as "of high value and interest as a storehouse of allusion 
to contemporary poets, and for the light it throws upon the 
critical ideas of the Cambridge in which Spenser was 
bred".^^ For these reasons, therefore, whatever Spenser's 
connection with Sidney and the Areopagus may have 
been after the substantial completion of the Shepherd's 
Calender, it is hazardous to accept this poem as a part 
of the program of that literary circle.*^ 

My theory of the literary influences which brought about 
the composition and publication of the Shepherd's Calender 
can be stated briefly. Considered as a literary, not a polit- 
ical, work this poem is distinctly a Cambridge production. 
The men whom Spenser imitated, whether he avowed the 
relation or not (in addition to the Latin and Greek authors 
whom he had studied at school), such as Petrarch, Boc- 
caccio, Castiglione, and various other French and Italian 
writers, held a high place in the estimation of scholars at 
the University.^* The ancient authors whom E. K. has 
quoted in support of his critical views — Plato, Cicero, 
Xenophon, Aristotle, Homer, Euripides, Hippocrates, 
Plutarch, Seneca, Lucian, as well as the contributors to the 
Bible — lay in the curriculum of the undergraduate or 

"C/. ed. Haslewood, pp. 23-5. Although Webbe had studied the 
critical remarks of E.K., he had not seen The English Foete, the 
loss of which he regretted. 

'^ The Eev. Eonald Bayne in Diet. Nat. Biog., art. Webbe. 

'' Other differences in literary opinion between Sidney and Spenser 
(as represented by the Calender) may be found, but bear less directly 
on the Shepherd's Calender than those discussed above. On the degree 
of alliteration necessary for poetry Sidney would probably have 
agreed with the protests of E. K. (cf. Apologie, p. 57). Conversely, 
the statement that verse was not essential to poetry {ibid., pp. 11-12) 
Spenser probably would not have accepted, judging from his practice, 

*• Harvey, Worlcs (Grosart), I, p. 69. 



THE AREOPAGUS 283 

graduate course of study.«=* Finally, the work at its com- 
pletion was referred to the judgment of another Cambridge 
man, who, in spite of his pedantry, enjoyed the distinction 
of being held "learned" (Harvey). William Webbe, a 
member of St. John's College, who proceeded B.A, in the 
same year as Spenser (1572-3), certainly regarded the 
Shepherd's Calender as a Cambridge production, and has 
connected it with the poet's own college.^^ 

The publication of this work was due to the concerted 
action of these three Cambridge graduates, and, together 
with the appearance of the Harvey-Spenser correspond- 
ence, represented a species of literary advertisement. 
Spenser, like Virgil and like Ronsard, aspired to be the 
New Poet of his country, and he first sought an audience 
and tested his wings in the low-flying pastoral. In the 
revival of ancient words this trio of friends stood agreed, 
in opposition to Sidney,^'' and the national aspect of the 
poem they emphasized by the acknowledgment of Chaucer 
as the well-spring of English poetry and as the master of 
their New Poet. The mystery which surrounded the 
author, the commentator, the heroine, and various indi- 
viduals in the poem, as well as the praise of Queen Eliza- 
beth and the Earl of Leicester, was partly intended to 
whet the curiosity of the book-buyer and to stimulate the 
jaded palates of worldly readers, although this air of con- 
cealment was also due to the Puritan nature of the attacks 

" C/. Harvey, ibid.; MuUinger, I, pp. 110-1, 401-39 (passim) ; and 
Ascham, The Scholemaster, bk. 2, passim, who is prescribing a course 
of study based largely on his connection with Cambridge. It is notice- 
able that Sidney, who was not a Cambridge man, differs widely from 
E. K. in the authorities upon whom he draws, and also sometimes in 
his opinion of the ones mentioned by both. 

^A Discourse of English Poetrie (Haslewood), p. 36. 

" For Harvey 's regard for archaism, cf. Prof. Fletcher, op. eit., 
p. 439. 



284 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

against the policy of the government. The pains-taking 
elucidations of the commentator indicate how anxious the 
promoters were that the book should receive a wide cir- 
culation. 

Only one thing remained, to find a patron for this work, 
and several lay near at hand among the residents or 
habitues of Leicester House, with whom the secretarial 
nature of Spenser's duties brought him in contact. Not- 
withstanding E. K.'s remark in April, 1579, that the poet 
had ' ' dedicated it to the Noble and worthy Gentleman, the 
right worshipful Ma. Phi. Sidney ",^^ the poet still wavered 
in his selection as late as October of the same year. Evi- 
dently Harvey, who hoped to receive recognition as a liter- 
ary dictator through the success of the poem, wished Spen- 
ser to dedicate it to Leicester.^^ But the poet demurred; 
he probably felt doubtful whether Leicester would stand 
sponsor for the Puritan satire if Burghley and the Angli- 
cans ascertained its true bent, for the Earl and his friends 
in the autumn of 1579 lay under a cloud on account of the 
Queen's discovery of his marriage with the Countess of 
Essex and on account of his opposition to the French 
match. The praise of Grindal and the attack on Lord 
North, Leicester's friend and connection by marriage,"'* 
would likewise have been unacceptable to this nobleman. 
Yet Spenser wished to make his bid for fame, and among 
all his compositions at this time — the Dreames, Legendes, 

^ Cf. the Epistle. Thia was introduced probably for the public, 
in order that it might be understood that Spenser intended no slight 
to his most intimate friend, Harvey, by failing to inscribe to him the 
first fruits of his poetry. 

^'Cf. letter of Spenser, October 5 (16), 1579- (Harvey, Worlcs, I, 
p. 6). 

*"Lord North married the widow of Sir Henry Dudley, an elder 
brother of Leicester (Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 292). My interpreta- 
tion of the September eclogue identifies him with the Wolf. 



THE AREOPAGUS 



285 



Court of Cupide, "My Slomler and the other pamph- 
lets, "^^ The English Poete, etc.— the Shepherd's Calender 
alone had reached that stage which would warrant pub- 
lication. Perhaps he enlightened Sidney in regard to 
the scope of the Puritan satire, or perhaps he disclosed 
only half the truth. At any rate, he had been made 
cautious by the reception which Sidney had accorded 
Gosson's The School of Abuse, which had been dedicated 
to him without authorization, and he probably felt that 
in spite of the celebration of Lecister in two eclogues he 
had better emphasize the literary, rather than the polit- 
ical, aspect of the poem, by inscribing it to the young 
twenty-five-year-old Sidney, "a special favourer and main- 
tainer of all kind of learning". 

Spenser was putting his fortune to the touch in an en- 
deavor to acquire political advancement at the hands of 
Leicester and his party, through the fame which his poem 
would bring, and through the material assistance which he 
hoped to give them by the Puritan nature of his satire. 
At the same time, he came to find out after his connection 
with Leicester that certain matters touched upon in his 
poem would be disagreeable to the Earl if discovered by 
him. Yet he was unwilling to put off his bid for fame, 
and he had no other work sufficiently advanced to put 
forth in the place of the Calender. Rather than injure the 
purely literary side of his poem by omitting certain 
eclogues — the "July" and "September" — he chose to em- 
phasize the literary projects of the work by the dedication 
to Sidney, with the hope that his patrons would fail to per- 
ceive, or, if they discerned, would fail to take offence at, 
the objectionable contents. If Leicester and Sidney had 
not been in disgrace at this time, — i. e. from the summer of 
1579 until several months of the following year had elapsed, 

»' Cf. Harvey, Works, 1, p. 8. 



286 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

— perhaps Spenser might have secured political employ- 
ment in England. But, as matters turned out, the poet 
over-estimated the regard which Leicester entertained 
for him. 

Sidney, therefore, acted as the patron of Spenser's 
eclogues just as Gallus had done in the ease of Virgil's.®^ 
As an employe of his uncle's, as a supporter of the Puri- 
tan party, and as a poet and a scholar, Spenser interested 
him in their somewhat casual association. Although this 
poet and his critical supporter, E. K., then entertained 
and urged certain reformations in English poetry with 
which Sidney disagreed, or failed to support adequately 
other innovations which he cherished, the latter acted as 
a patron of the New Poet probably without examining his 
work very carefully. After this poem had been planned 
and executed, certain literary views of Spenser, such as 
those connected with rusticity of style, archaic diction, 
and old-fashioned metres, partly no doubt through asso- 
ciation with Sidney and other courtiers underwent a 
change. Owing to these new influences Spenser's later 
work — the Faerie Queene, many of the poems in the vol- 
ume of Complaints, the Amoretti, and the Epithalamion — 
may be held to represent the program of the Areopagus, 
but the Shepherd's Calender, which was probably largely 
written before Spenser knew Sidney and probably before 
the Areopagus had been organized, was an expression and 
example of theories for the reformation of English poetry 
differing from Sidney 's to an extent that renders it hazard- 
ous to consider this work as the mouth-piece of that society. 

vi. The Biography of Spenser (1576-1580) 

From the time of the earlier writers on the life of 
Spenser to the authorities of the present day the Shep- 

'^"The new Virgil had found his Gallus" (Mackail, The Springs 
of Helicon, p. 81 ) . 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 287 

herd's Calender has been used to illustrate his biography 
during the years which immediately preceded its appear- 
ance. It is seldom that any two writers agree on the exact 
course of events in his life during this period, a result not 
altogether surprising in view of the inferential nature of 
the information bearing upon this subject. The upshot, 
however, has been that a great deal of biographical lumber 
has been accumulated which has enjoyed a more or less 
wide acceptance and the questionable nature of which it is 
necessary to point out in the beginning. 

From the poet's commencement in the degree of M.A. on 
June 26, 1576,^ until October 15, 1579, the date of his first 
letter to Harvey,^ the following is the sole bit of authentic 
evidence which furnishes a definite date : from a note in a 
copy of Copland's edition of the old romance of Howle- 
glas, now contained in the Bodleian library, it is known 
that Spenser presented Harvey with this work on Decem- 
ber 20, 1578, at London, playfully binding him to read 
it before the approaching first of January on the penalty 
of forfeiting a four-volume edition of Lucian.^ This estab- 
lishes the fact that Spenser was in London at this time. In 
three other instances information of questionable accuracy 
has been used in support of alleged dates and facts in the 
life of the poet at this period. In the View of the Present 
State of Ireland, written in the last few years of his life, 

* Cf. H. J. Todd, Life of Spenser, prefixed to Vol. I of his edition, 
p. i, who quotes the MSS. notes of Dr. Farmer in the first volume of 
Hughes's second edition (1750) and also Chalmers's Suppl. Apology, 
etc., p. 23. 

" The date given at the end of this letter, October 5, is invalidated 
by the following remark which it contains: "thus much was written 
at Westminister yesterday: but comming this morning, beeyng the 
sixteenth of October, to Mystresse Kerkes, " etc., cf. Harvey, WorTcs, 
I, p. 8. 

"Macray, Annals of the Bodleian Library, p. 92. 



288 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Irenaeus, who seems to represent the poet, remarks that 
he had witnessed at Limerick the execution of Murrough 
O'Brein, "a notable traytour"/ which took place on July 
1, 1577,^ This finds apparent corroboration in a statement 
by Edward Phillips, the nephew of Milton, who declared 
in his Theatrum Poetarum Anglicanorum (1675) that 
Spenser went to Ireland as secretary to Sir Henry Sidney,® 
whose last Lord Deputyship lasted from August 5, 1575, 
until September 12, 1578."^ 

John Aubrey, the seventeenth century antiquarian, in 
his Lives of Eminent Men gives another biographic bit of 
news under Spenser: '*Mr. Samuel "Woodford (the poet 
who paraphras'd the Psalmes) lives in Hampshire, near 
Alton, and he told me that Mr. Spenser lived sometime in 
those parts." Grosart, while admitting that no date was 
given, attempted to make capital out of the above piece of 
gossip for this period of Spenser's life.* Aubrey's author- 
ity, Woodford, whom Grosart has made "the confidant of 
Sidney and his sister Mary, Countess of Pembroke", was 
not born until 1636,^ when Sidney had been dead just half 
a century, and his sister fourteen years. Alton, moreover, 
lay over forty miles distant from the residence of the 
Countess at Wilton and, therefore, scarcely in its neighbor- 
hood. But Aubrey is never very accurate, and this current 
failing, together with the lack of mention of a date, renders 
this material useless for the life of Spenser during the 
years 1576-1580. Phillips also cannot be trusted, not 
only on account of his loose manner of writing biography in 

* Globe ed., p. 636. 

'Cf. letter of Sir Wm. Drury, July 8 (1577), in Cal. Carew MSS., 
1575-1588, p. 104. 

'Edition of 1800 by Sir Egerton Brydges, p. 148. 
' Article on Sir Henry Sidney, Diet. Nat. Biog. 
" Spenser, WorTcs, I, pp. 130-1. 
•Article on Woodford, Bid. Nat. Biog. 



BIOGRAPHY OP SPENSER 289 

general, but, specifically, because he makes Sir Henry the 
"brother" of Philip Sidney, represents Spenser as return- 
ing with him after Philip's death (1586),^" and knows 
nothing of the poet's connection with Lord Grey.^^ The 
remarks of Irenaeus in the View is the most credible of 
the three, but it is unwise to insist too rigorously on his 
absolute identification with the poet on all matters of 
detail.^^ On the whole, then, these pieces of biographical 
evidence are at present unsuitable for the elucidation of 
Spenser's movements, and should be held in reserve until 
they receive support from fresh information. 

From the Shepherd's Calender and from the Harvey- 
Spenser correspondence knowledge is gained of one of the 
most important facts in Spenser's whole life — i. e. that he 
made the acquaintance of Sir Philip Sidney and his uncle, 
the Earl of Leicester, at this period (circa 1578-9). Of 
the origin of this connection nothing is definitely known, 
yet any work upon the Calender would be incomplete with- 
out some speculative discussion of it, and this I now pro- 
pose to give. In order to treat this event in a proper light, 
however, it will be first necessary to invalidate another 
theory which has received currency in many quarters — the 
a^ociation of the Shepherd's Calender with the life of the 
poet in north-east Lancashire. 

The foremost, not the first, advocate of this theory has 
been the late Dr. Grosart. The best refutation of it 
appeared in an article on Spenser's Rosalind by P. W. 

" Sir Henry Sidney died May 5, 1586. 

" Mitf ord, I, p. XV, records how the statement of Phillips prob- 
ably originated. 

" Cf. the forcible description of the death and funeral of the Earl 
of Leicester in The Buines of Time (Globe ed., p. 491) uttered in 
character by the spirit of Verulam, but which from its very nature 
might be accepted as evidence of Spenser's presence in England at 
this date, if outside information to the contrary had been lacking. 

20 



290 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Long in Anglia for 1908 (Vol. XXXI). A repetition of 
Mr. Long's arguments, supplemented by some of my own, 
I believe necessary in a work of this kind, in order to 
destroy this theory set forth by Grosart and others, which 
many writers have been content to swallow bait, hook, line, 
and all.^^ 

The basis of this theory harks back to an article by F. 
C. Spencer in the Gentleman's Magazine (1842)," which 
owes a great deal of its authority to a communication of 
John Travers of Birch Hill, Cork, in Ireland.^^ The latter, 
who claimed a descent from a John Travers of county Cork, 
the husband of a certain Sarah Spenser, asserted to be the 
poet's sister, stated ''that he himself descended from a 
Lancashire stock" and that these Spensers "were from 
Lancashire ".^^ This ancestor he described as the "eldest 
son of Brian Travers, of Nateby in Lancashire, Esq. ' ' The 
inaccuracy of this statement Grosart admitted, for he 
found that "the only one of this name who occurs in local 
records of the period is a Brian Travers" of Halton in 
Cheshire. Although this place is thirty miles distant, as 
the crow flies, from Preston,^'^ near which the main family 
of Travers lived, Grosart connected Brian Travers with 
the latter. The relation of the Irish John Travers who 
married a Sarah Spenser to the Travers family of Lanca- 
shire is therefore entirely hypothetical. 

From this untrustworthy evidence F. C. Spencer pro- 

" The most eminent of these are Professor C. H. Herf ord, Mr. 
Sidney Lee, and Mr. J. W. Hales. 

"Vol. XVIII, 2nd ser., pp. 138-43. 

" In The Patrician, V, p. 54. 

" Quoted in F. C. Spencer's article, p. 139. A great many mistakes 
have been made in the spelling of this last gentleman's name; the 
above is taken from his signature at the end of the article in question. 

" Nateby and Tulketh, the seats of this family, lay near Preston, 
Lancashire, which is roughly fifteen miles distant from the Pendle 
district. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 291 

ceeded to localize the Spensers, who spelled their names with 
an s, in the Pendle district of north-east Lancashire. 
He also dilated upon the prevalence of the surnames of 
Edmund and Laurence (said to be the name of the poet's 
second son)^^ among these Spensers. Following this lead 
Grosart, who "has met with the surname Spencer^" in 
Inquisitions and Visitations, Wills and Parish Registers, 
University and School Records, all over" certain counties, 
which form only nine out of a total of forty, however, has 
affirmed the truth of the following thesis : "it is a some- 
what noticeable fact that whilst the surname Spencer- — 
spelled with a *c', not an 's' — is found in most of the coun- 
ties of England, that of Spenser — spelled with an 's', not a 
'c' — is practically limited — earliest and latest — to a small 
district in the north-east angle of Lancashire"."" This 
conclusion is entirely unwarranted. Mr. P. M. Buck, Jr. 
has given a list of names of Spencers and Spensers which 
he has found in twenty-seven English counties, and which 
were taken from "Wills, Registers, Inquisitions, Chancery 
Records, State Papers, Domestic and Foreign, Heralds' 
Visitations, Accounts, etc."^^ Under Wills of Lichfield 
and Birmingham, for example, he has found forty-three 
Spensers to three Spencers, and under Wills of Glouces- 
tershire and Wiltshire fourteen of the former to thirteen 
of the latter. This last bit of statistics shows conclusively 
that the spelling of the name with an s was not confined 

" Although the name of his younger brother Peregrine occurs in 
the Lismore Papers, III (2nd ser.), pp. 79-80, there is no mention of 
this Laurence. The asserted kinship rests solely on the evidence of 
Sir Wm. Betham (cf. Globe ed., p. liv), and is not free from suspicion. 

" Long most unfortunately quotes the name as Spenser in this 
passage. His various spellings of the name of F. C. Spencer (cf. 
especially p. 84) are also confusing. 

^ Life of Spenser in Works, I, p. xi. 

'^Mod. Lang. Notes (1906), XXI, pp. 83-4. 



292 Spenser's shephebd's calender 

to north-east Lancashire.-^ As everyone knows, the Eliza- 
bethans exercised no uniformity in the spelling of proper 
names. Even the poet's name is spelled with a c. This 
occurs in the title page of Colin Clout's Come Home 
Again, ^^ in the signatures to the sonnet to Harvey (July 
18, 1588) and to the one Prefixed to 'the Commonwealth 
and Government of Venice', in the introductory poem by 
W. L. before the Faerie Queene, where both spellings occur 
side by side, in an Irish document among the signatures of 
the undertakers,-* and at least five times among the papers 
of Richard Boyle, Earl of Cork, in connection with Pere- 
grine.^^ The names Spencer and Spenser are everywhere 
encountered in English documents of the sixteenth century, 
and the list of the names which I have jotted down in the 
course of my investigations entirely confirms Mr. Buck's 
conclusions.^^ 

From these inaccurate classifications, Grosart proceeded 
to consider the Calender as a north-east Lancashire pro- 
duction. Of his two principal theses in this respect the 
first deals with words : ' ' that in agreement with the North- 

^^ Mr. Buck, in the course of his investigation, found one hundred 
and seventy-three (173) cases of different persons bearing the name 
of Spenser at this time. 

=» Cited by Long, p. 85. 

" Cal. Carew MSS., 1589-1600, p. 61. In the three depositions of 
Lord Eoche, in the three papers discovered by P. M. Buck, Jr., noted 
in Mod. Lang. Notes (1904), XIX, pp. 237-8, in Bryskett's Discourse 
of Civil Life, and elsewhere in the Carew MSS., the name always 
occurs as Spenser. Grosart is therefore wrong in his statement that 
"the poet and his family are almost invariably spelled with a 'c' in 
Irish documents", a remark which Long uses (pp. 84-5). 

-' Other instances may be met in the critical writings of Merea and 
Bolton, and in Nashe's dedication of Christ's Teares over Jerusalem. 

" Cf. Dugdale, History of Warwickshire, passim, where he has con- 
tinually found the names of the Spencers of Althorpe spelled with 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 293 

East Lancashire localization of the Family of Spenser, the 
entire poetry of Spenser has worked into it a relatively 
large number of Lancashire, and specifically North-East 
Lancashire, words and idiomatic phrases ".^'^ This conten- 
tion of Grosart, w^hose uncritical methods allowed him to 
classify as north-east Lancastrian any dialectical or ar- 
chaic words and phrases occurring both in the Calender 
and in the dialect of that district, has been largely dis- 
credited. The subject is too long to discuss here, and I 
will therefore refer my readers to the work of Professor 
Herford and of Mr. Long on this subject. The lists drawn 
up by the former "sufficiently illustrate the highly com- 
posite quality of the language of the Shepheards Calender. 
However many words and usages Spenser may have bor- 
rowed from Northern dialects, the language even of the 
homeliest Eclogues is not substantially dialectical. Dialect 
words are everywhere freely mingled with cultured words, 
even with Latin neologisms, which no rustic lips ever 
fashioned."'^ Of the words beginning with A and B 
which Grosart classified as north-east Lancastrian,^* Mr. 
Long found that none were "distinctively Lancastrian",^" 
a conclusion which agrees with Herford 's. Mr. J. W. 
Hales, who believed that Spenser visited Lancashire after 
his departure from Cambridge and that his family origi- 
nated there,^^ in writing of a paper drawn up by T. T. 
Wilkinson in support of this same thesis stated that "of 
no word is it shown that it is distinctively East Lanca- 
shire ' '.^^ The antiquarian "Waif ord remarked that the lan- 

" Spenser, WorTcs, I, pp. xlii j^^. 
^ Introduction, pp. xlviii-lxvi. 
^ Spenser, WorTcs, I, pp. 408-417. 

'•His work. is of course based on the New English Dictionary and 
the English Dialect Dictionary. 
^* Globe ed., pp. xvii-xviii. 
^ Folia Litteraria, p. 157. 



294 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

guage of the Calender "is in reality the English language 
of the sixteenth century, moulded partially, as regards 
style, on that of Chaucer, and with here and there an 
obsolete word stuck in to give an archaic appearance". 
He proceeded to point out that the Lancashire words found 
in the Calender are all in common use to this day among 
counties further south.^^ In conclusion, I cannot do better 
than quote another authority of the present day: "the 
asserted Lancashire setting and dialect of the Shepheard's 
Calender are uncritical myths: setting and language are 
not local, but literary and composite, artificial rustic 
('Doric') and conventional 'Arcadian' ".^* 

This last quotation leads to the other contention of 
Grosart: "that North-East Lancashire scenery as dis- 
tinguished from Southern (e. g. Kent and its dales and 
downs), and the historically known character of the people 
of the district, are similarly reflected in the Poems; whilst 
the places in the 'Glosse', etc. can only be understood as 
applied to North-East Lancashire ".^^ The elaborate argu- 
ments intended to demonstrate the truth of this thesis have 
now sunk into a mere curiosity of literary criticism. The 
discovery of the sources used by Spenser^^ and a critical 
comparison of the Calender with these show conclusively 
that the setting of the poem is artificial and conventional, 
and that it therefore does not reflect the scenery of any 
particular locality. The place-references in the gloss like- 
wise never point to north-east Lancashire, Kent and 

^Walford's Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer (1884), V, 
pp. 229-37. 

^Fletcher, Encycl. Amer. 

^ Spenser, Works, I, pp. lii-liii -ff. 

^Articles by F. Kluge in Anglia (1880), III, pp. 266-74, and by 
O. Eeissert in Anglia (1886), IX, pp. 205-224. Cf. also Henry 
Morley, Clement Marot, I, pp. 255-75, and II, pp. 20-32. 



J 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 295 

Surrey being the only counties mentioned either in the 
text or the gloss.^^ 

Although the statement of Grosart that Spenser visited 
north-east Lancashire after he left the University is un- 
founded, the evidence to which he has pointed in the last 
part of his latter thesis has always been considered bio- 
graphic. Of this the June eclogue furnishes the chief 
piece, in which Hobbinol (Harvey) gives Colin (Spenser) 
the following advice : 

" Then, if by me thou list advised be, 
Forsake the soyle that so doth thee bewitch: 
Leave me those billes where harbrough nis to see, 
Nor holy-bush, nor brere, nor winding witche : 
And to the dales resort, where shepheards ritch, 
And f ruictf ull flocks, bene every where to see : " 

(11. 17-22) 

To this passage Kirke appended the following glosses: 

" forsake the soyle (1. 18). This is no Poetical fiction, but unfeyn- 
edly spoken of the Poete selfe, who for speciall occasion of pri- 
vate affayres, (as I have bene partly of himself e informed) and 
for his more preferment, removing out of the Northparts, came 
into the South, as Hobbinoll indeed advised him privately." 

"Those hylles (1. 19), that is in the North eountrye, where he 
dwelt." 

"The Dales (1. 21). The Southpartes, where he now abydeth, 
which thoughe they be full of hylles and woodes (for Kent is 
very hyllye and woodye, and therefore so called, for Kantsh in 
the Saxons tongue signifieth woodie,) yet in respecte of the 
Northpartes they may be called dales. For indede the North is 
counted the higher eountrye." 

From these remarks it is evident that Spenser dwelt in 
the "North eountrye" for some time, and that it was by 

'^Long's remarks on this subject (op. cit., pp. 90-4) illustrate 
the emptiness of this opinion of Grosart. 



296 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Harvey's advice that he journeyed to the " Southpartes ". 
In spite of the conventionality of Spenser's scenery, and 
in spite of his imitation of Virgil's first eclogue,^® the gloss 
clearly points to a biographic interpretation of the text. 
Long errs in considering the gloss and the text as con- 
temporaneous expressions.^** As I have already attempted 
to show, it is highly improbable that they were written at 
the same time.*** The only certain facts are that at the 
time to which the poem alludes Hobbinol (Harvey) advised 
Colin Clout (Spenser) to remove ''out of the Northparts", 
and that at the time when Kirke made his annotations, 
during the period between September, 1578, and April, 
1579, Spenser was living in the " Southpartes ". Since 
Kirke merely selects Kent as typical of the latter region, 
and since he does not state that Spenser dwelt in Kent, it 
is unwise to connect this eclogue with the seat of the Sid- 
neys at Penhurst, as some writers have done.*^ In the 
April eclogue it is true that Spenser is described as "the 
Southerne shepheardes boye" (1. 21), a nobleman dwell- 

"In his various allusions to this eclogue of Virgil (pp. 79, 80, 85) 
Long makes the mistake of supposing that "Tityrus (Virgil) was 
supposed to speak here of his transfer of residence from Mantua to 
Rome". This is untrue, for the scene is manifestly laid in the 
country near Mantua (c/. notes in ed. Greenough & Kittredge, 
Bucolica, p. 35). 

^ Cf. particularly, op. cit., p. 79. 

*• Notice the article on E. K., who composed the gloss between 
September, 1578, and April, 1579. If we are to accept, as a cri- 
terion, Spenser's prevailing custom at this time of allowing a work 
to remain some while in MS., a good part of the Calender, including 
the June eclogue, had probably been composed before E. K. began 
the gloss. 

** Long remarks: "when Colin is visiting Hobbinoll (June eclogue), 
since they speak of 'those hills' and describe the dales as 'here' and 
as 'these places', they must be conversing in Kent" (p. 79). But 
E. K. does not identify "these places", etc. with Kent, merely with 
the " Southpartes ", of which Kent is only a type. 



BIOGRAPHY OP SPENSER 297 

ing "perhaps in Surrye or Kent" (gloss), but this noble- 
man I believe to have been Leicester, who did not reside 
at Penshurst. As Kirke, however, identifies ' ' those hylles ' ' 
"in the North countrye" with the place "where he (Spen- 
ser) dwelt" and "the dales" of "the Southpartes" with 
the place "where he now abydeth", the locality to which 
the poem refers is worth while to establish, even though its 
pastoral setting is Arcadian. 

The surmises of Keightly*^ and Long*^ that Cambridge is 
this "North countrye" seem to me altogether reasonable. 
It is certainly more critical to connect this allusion (eel. vi, 
11. 18-20) with a place in which Spenser is known to have 
resided at about this time of his life, than with imaginary 
abodes in Lancashire, Worcestershire,** or Northampton- 
shire.*^ Contemporary documents designate places as in the 
north which are practically no further removed from 
London than Cambridge. Here are extracts from letters of 
the Duke of Norfolk 's servants, which refer to his residence 
at Kenninghall, Norfolk: "when the Duke went last from 
Court to his house in the North ;"*^ "Mr. Myddleton and 
his wife (servants of Norfolk) will be in the north parts 
about a three weeks hence ".*^ Now Kirke, who evidently 
composed the gloss in London, was probably speaking of 
Cambridge as the "Northparts" in accordance with the 
prevalent point of view of a resident of London.** 

*" On the Life of Edmund Spenser, in Fraser 's Magazine, LX, pp. 
410-22. 

* Op. cit., p. 85. 

**Mr. F. G. Fleay identified the home of Eosalind with the vale of 
Evesham on the strength of an interpretation of Drayton (eel. viii), 
which connected her with the Cotswold hills (cf. p. 213). 

*' The Spencers of Althorpe lived in this county. Cf. the surmise 
in Ealph Church, The Faerie Queen, I, p. xviii. 

*• Green, Cal. State Papers, p. 273. 

" Cal. Hatfield MSS., i, p. 516. 

** Notice the following remark of the Spanish ambassador : ' ' the 



298 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

On the other hand, London may be plausibly understood 
as the "Southpartes", where Spenser would have the best 
opportunity of receiving preferment, and to which the alle- 
gorical language of "shepheards ritch", "fruictfull flocks", 
and the joys of society and poetry — the "frendly Faeries" 
and the ' ' systers nine ' ' — naturally applies. It is noticeable 
that Hobbinol (Harvey) does not say that he lives in "these 
places", as Long has inferred;*' he merely knows of them, 
or has visited them, and his "here" (1. 23) and 

" Such pierlesse pleasures have we in these places " 

(1. 32) 

are probably only colloquial descriptive expressions. This 
locality, moreover, is nowhere identified with that of the 
first stanza. The latter plausibly represents Cambridge, or 
perhaps Saffron Walden, Harvey's home, a place where 
Spenser doubtlessly often visited him in the summer-time. 
From this point of view Hobbinol's allusion to "those 
hilles" is also perfectly intelligible, for through his fellow- 
ship at the University he was to continue to live in that 
locality, as the quotation implies, whence he could easily 
reach Saffron Walden, about fourteen miles distant. As 
Mr. Long suggests, "those hilles" may have been the 
Gogmagog hills,^° which are described as "high" by Cam- 
den^ ^ and as "of a great eminency" in another authori- 
tative work of the seventeenth century.^^ The latter adds 
that the country people told "fine fabulous stories" about 

Queen has not been at all gratified by the people in the North in 
consequence of the large number of Catholics that there are amongst 
them" (Cal. State Papers, Span., 1568-79, p. 613). This reference 
is to the Queen's progress of 1578, when she went no further north 
than Norwich. 

*» Op. cit., p. 79. , 

"» Op. dt., p. 98, 

'^Britannia (ed. by Gough), II, p. 213. 

"^E. Blome, Britannia (1673), p. 50. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 299 

them, a statement which accords with Spenser's allusions 
to "night-ravenes" (1. 23) and "elvish ghosts" (1. 24), if 
anyone is anxious to see more than a conventional follow- 
ing of Virgil, Marot, and others. 

The preceding, therefore, is my solution of this much 
discussed reference, which I have felt compelled to give at 
some length. On Harvey's advice, then, Spenser left the 
vicinity of Cambridge and betook himself to London, at 
some date between June 26, 1576, and December 20, 1578, 
when Harvey recorded his friend's residence there in the 
copy of Eowleglas. Of course, the most important event 
of this period was his meeting with the Earl of Leicester 
and Philip Sidney. No one knows how or when it took 
place, and the accounts which various biographers have 
conjectured differ widely, based as they are on tradition^' 
or idle speculation.^* The facts from which critical infer- 
ences may be drawn I shall briefly discuss. 

From May 26, 1572, until early in June, 1575, Philip 
Sidney had been travelling on the Continent. Upon his 
return in the summer of 1575 he accompanied the Queen 
in her progress, passing the greater part of July at Kenil- 
worth, and visiting the seat of the Earl of Essex at Chart- 
ley, and later, other places, such as Stafford, Dudley, and 
Worcester. The progress ended at Woodstock on Septem- 
ber 11.^° In November Sidney was in London, and the 
following winter he probably resided with his uncle at 
Leicester House, and employed much of his time in im- 
proving his acquaintance with the Earl of Essex and with 
Edward Dyer.^® At the end of this period spent at Court 
— i. e. in July, 1576 — he accompanied Essex to Ireland on 

'"Dean Church, for instance, follows tradition (Spenser, p. 23). 
" I regret to say that this term fairly applies to the account of 
Grosart, I, pp. 43-68, 130-1. 
" Fox Bourne, Sidney, pp. 95-6. 
"" Ibid., pp. 98-101. 



300 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

a visit to his father, who had left England the previous 
August." About October 1 he returned,^^ and we find 
him "at Greenwich, where the Queen was staying, on the 
4th of November".^® During the next three months he 
probably remained at Court.®" From February 23 until 
early in June, 1577, he was abroad on a diplomatic mission, 
on his return from which in July he paid a visit to his 
newly married sister, the Countess of Pembroke, at Wilton. 
During this summer, when he was engaged in defending 
the Irish policy of his father, he remained in strict attend- 
ance on the Queen. "Except during the three or four 
weeks he passed at Wilton in July and August, 1577, and 
perhaps some other and shorter holidays at Penshurst, 
Philip seems to have been in almost constant attendance on 
the Queen for more than two years after his return from 
Germany; usually going with her when she went to keep 
Court at Richmond, or Windsor, or any other of her own or 
her subjects' houses in the country, and, when she was in 
London, taking up his abode, at such times as he could be 
spared from the royal presence, either at Baynard 's Castle*^ 
or at Leicester House. "®^ During the summer of 1577 the 
Queen kept her abode chiefly at Greenwich, owing to the 
prevalence of the plague, although she paid two visits in 
Surrey.®^ On July 27, 1578, however, during her progress 
through the eastern counties, she was met at Audley End 
by a deputation from the University of Cambridge headed 
by Dr. Howland, the Vice-Chancellor. This visit Gabriel 
Harvey described in his Xalpe, vel Graiulationis Valdi- 

"Dict. Nat. Biog. 

» Ihid. 

"Fox Bourne, p. 109. 

"lUd., p. 111. 

" The London residence of the Earl of Pembroke. 

*" Fox Bourne, p. 137. 

"Nichols, Progresses of Queen Elisabeth, II, pp. 53-64. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 301 

nensis, to which Kirke refers in the September gloss. Of 
the four books in this work the first is dedicated to the 
Queen, the second to Leicester, the third to Burghley, and 
the fourth to Oxford, Hatton, and Sidney jointly. In the 
epilogue to the second book Harvey has described his pre- 
sentation to the Queen by Leicester, who is made to say that 
he had intended to send Harvey into France and Italy.^* 
This implies some acquaintance on Harvey's part with 
Leicester. In the fourth book there occurs a fulsome 
laudation of Sidney, which, however, implies no previous 
acquaintance. Indeed, it is probable from the absurdity 
of its exaggerated praises that Harvey could have known 
little of the character and tastes of the person for whom he 
intended them.^^ Unless, therefore, we are to suppose that 
Spenser had the good fortune to meet Leicester or Sidney 
in some chance way — a meeting which seems altogether un- 
likely on account of his probable residence in the vicinity 
of Cambridge in 1576-8, which neither Leicester nor 
Sidney visited from 1569 until the time of which we are 
speaking, — the progress at Audley End, with its attendant 
circumstance of Harvey's doings thereat, offers the most 
plausible date for the beginning of this connection. 

Nevertheless, in contradiction to this view of the origin 
of Spenser's acquaintance with Leicester and Sidney, which 
places it somewhat later than most biographers have been 
disposed to do,®^ an article*^^ published a few years ago sets 

•"Harvey, WorTcs (Grosart), I, p. xxxix, 

* Grosart in his edition of Harvey, I, pp. xxxv-xliii, prints the 
only parts which relate to Leicester and Spenser, accompanied by 
translations. 

** The year 1577 seems to be the one most often used, a result 
probably due to Phillips's reference, taken together with the state- 
ment in the View, to the poet's employment in Ireland by Sir Henry 
Sidney. 

" P. M, Buck, Jr., Notes on the ' ' Shepherd 's Calender ' ', and 
Other Matters concerning the Life of Edmund Spenser, in Mod. Lang. 
Notes (1906), XXI, pp. 80^. 



302 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

forth what is the latest theory on the subject. The author 
of this, Mr, P. M. Buck, Jr., seeks to prove, among other 
matters, ' ' that the acquaintance between Spenser and Sid- 
ney was of much earlier origin" than is usually imagined. 
Using the Calender as the basis for his theory he believes 
' ' that there is in the poem a certain air of familiarity with 
the Sidneys and the Dudleys which would hardly be con- 
sistent with the view that the poet was attempting by its 
means to gain favor with them". Of the four pieces of 
evidence which Buck adduces, the first is the description of 
Colin Clout (Spenser) in the April eclogue as "the South- 
erne shepheardes boye" (1. 21). In company with other 
writers Buck identifies this shepherd with Sidney, on the 
strength of the gloss-reference to "some Southern noble- 
man, and perhaps in Surreye or Kent", taken in considera- 
tion with the actual residence of the Sidneys at Penshurst. 
Although it makes little difference whether this shepherd 
was Sidney or Leicester, for no one disputes that he is 
either one or the other, it seems more probable, on account 
of the designation of "nobleman", that the poet intended 
Leicester, as I have elsewhere stated.**^ Leicester possessed 
lands in both Kent and Surrey,"® the Sidneys only in the 
former, and references in Spenser's letters show that he 
served in the employ of this nobleman, a relation well indi- 
cated by the remark in the April eclogue. 

The second point concerns the love story of Perigot in 
the August eclogue, and here Buck, on a hint from the 
gloss that the allusion is biographic, feels that ' ' we have a 
covert allusion to the love of Sir Philip Sidney for his 
Stella, Penelope Devereux". As I have also stated in 

•« Cf. p. 243. 

"' Previous to the year 1579 Leicester had received tvro grants of 
property in each of these counties, the most important of which was 
the acquisition of the "Old Palace" at Maidstone, Kent, in 1574 
(cf. W. Rye, The Murder of Amy Boisart, appendix xv). 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 303 

another part of this work,"" Sidney's biographers and 
critics agree that his passion for Stella, whether they 
regard it as real or merely as conventional, evinced itself 
by his writings only after her marriage to Lord Rich,''^ 
which took place at any rate after March 10, 1581, at which 
date the Earl of Huntingdon, her guardian, applied to the 
Queen for permission for this marriage. The father of 
Penelope, the first Earl of Essex, had indeed suggested a 
marriage between Sidney and his daughter, then thirteen 
years of age, as early as 1576, the year after the young 
people had met at Chartley. On March 1, 1578, Sidney 
wrote to Languet that he had no intention of marrying,'^ 
and it is extremely doubtful if any of the sonnets intended 
for Stella were composed until over a year later. The 
relation between the two had therefore probably not as- 
sumed a definite enough shape by the spring of 1579 to 
allow of Spenser's referring to it. 

The third piece of evidence used by Buck is the allu- 
sion to Leicester in the October eclogue as "the worthy 
whome" the Queen "loveth best" (11. 47-8). Such refer- 
ences, however, were common enough, and conveyed nothing 
more than everyone knew, i. e. that Leicester occupied the 
first place in the favor of his sovereign. In the second book 
of the Gratulationes Valdenses, a work celebrating a public 
festival, Harvey asserted that everyone hoped the Queen 
would marry her favorite : 

" Cf. p. 244. 

""^ Fox Bourne, p. 241 ; Addleshaw, p. 326 ; Collins, Memoir prefixed 
to edition of Apologie for Poetrie, p. xvii; Lee, Diet. Nat. Biog.; 
J. A. Symonds, chap, vi, especially p. 107. Dr. Grosart in his 
Memorial Introduction to the Complete Foems of Sidney has dated 
no sonnet earlier than October, 1580 (p. Ivii). 

" S. A. Pears, The Correspondence of Sir Philip Sidney and Hubert 
Languet, p. 144. 



304 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

" Nemo tihi non regificos impertit honores, 
Expectat Capiti non Diadema tuo. 
Fata illis ignota Deum: sed quisque precatur 
Regalis tandem Sponsus ut esse queas."^^ 

The nature of Spenser's compliment does not therefore 
imply that he stood on terms of intimacy with the Earl, 
although this was probably true enough in the year 1579, 
and certainly does not indicate an acquaintance which had 
lasted for several years before the appearance of the 
Shepherd's Calender. 

The last link in Buck's argument relates to Dido, whom 
he has identified with Ambrosia Sidney. Although this 
solution is questionable,^* the point at issue concerns the 
fact that the eclogue (xi) indicates a personal knowledge 
of some maiden dear to Leicester (Lobbin). This allusion 
also implies some degree of intimacy, but no more than the 
poet may have gained after a few months' employment by 
his patron. Finally, it is a little difficult to determine how 
far back Buck would place the origin of the poet's ac- 
quaintance with Leicester and Sidney, for he mentions no 
date.'^^ Although Spenser had already "tasted" the 

" Edition of 1587, p. 5. This part is addressed to Leicester. 

" Cf. my article on Dido. 

" From a passage in the February eclogue, 

"But shall I tell thee a tale of truth, 
Which I cond of Tityrus in my youth, 
Keeping his sheep on the hills of Kent?" 

(11. 91-3) 

Buck infers that "Spenser spent a part of his youth in Kent", 
where he was ' ' a frequent visitor ' '. The clause in the last line, 
however, may presumably refer to Tityrus — i. e. Chaucer, who lived 
at Greenwich on the Kentish side of the Thames, and whose Canter- 
bury Tales are also laid in Kent. Chaucer actually resided in Kent, 
whereas no evidence exists to prove that Spenser lived there. This 
interpretation implies that the poet is guilty of using a loose kind 
of construction in the text, a proceeding, however, not without paral- 
lels in his work (eel. ii, 11. 7-8; ix, 11. 174-9). 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 305 

"sweetnesse" of favors from patrons by October, 1579 — 
plausibly an allusion to the employment which brought 
him to Leicester House, — there is nothing to show that this 
connection between patron and poet, master and dependent, 
had lasted for any length of time. Indeed Spenser's fear 
of "over-much cloying their noble ears" by his writings 
indicates rather a recent connection with his patrons, in 
the humoring of whose tastes and desires he felt compelled 
to proceed cautiously. 

Specifically, however, the plausibility of the theory here 
offered may be increased by two other considerations. If 
Spenser had by chance attracted the notice of Sidney or 
Leicester before the end of his college course, it is altogether 
unlikely that they would have allowed him to continue in 
the ignominious position of a sizar. Students so enrolled 
' ' were often called upon to perform offices distinctly menial 
in character", for instance, to act as chapel-clerks, porters, 
college-cooks, and as valets to the fellow-commoners 
and pensioners.'^^ If Spenser attracted the notice of Lei- 
cester and Sidney by his literary attainments, as he has 
himself intimated,^^ it w^ould have been an easy task for 
them to have recommended him to a fellowship after 
he had attained the degree of B.A.^^ There are few who 
believe, however, that the beginning of the acquaintance 
antedated Spenser's departure from the University, 

The second consideration arises from a set of conflicting 
circumstances revolving about the July eclogue which cer- 
tainly demands explanation. As everyone knows, the con- 
clusion of this eclogue pointedly alludes to the misfortune 

" Mullinger, I, pp. 399-400. 

"Harvey, Worhs (Grosart), I, p. 6. 

" The records of the Privy Council at this time are full of orders 
secured by favorites for the placing of men in academical positions. 
Cf. Acts Pr. C, 1575-7, p. 161, and 1577-8, p. 125; Mullinger, I, pp. 
71, 268-9. 

21 



306 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

of Archbishop Grindal, who had been sequestrated from 
the duties of his see in June, 1577, ostensibly on account of 
his unwillingness to stop the "prophesyings". It seems 
probable, however, that his punishment arose also from 
other matters, and that it was procured by the influence of 
Leicester. Sir John Harington, who lived in those times, 
and who would have been likely to know the truth, states 
that Grindal aroused the wrath of Leicester because he 
proceeded against the latter 's Italian physician, one Julio 
Borgarucei, for having two wives, and refused to humor 
Leicester by dropping the case. This ''great lord" "in- 
censed" the Queen "exceedingly against him", with the 
result that he was deprived.'^® Another contemporary, 
William Camden, has given the same reason for Grindal's 
disgrace.^" It has also been stated that Leicester had his 
eye on Lambeth palace and that Grindal refused to alienate 
it from the see.®^ "Whatever the exact truth of the whole 
matter may have been, it is clear that stories were circu- 
lated and credited at that time to the effect that Leicester 
had caused Grindal's downfall. The paradoxical situation 
then arises that Spenser praised the deposed Archbishop of 
Canterbury, whose disgrace was openly said to have been 
caused by the Earl of Leicester, in a work dedicated to the 
latter 's nephew, about the very time that he held some 
position in the employ of this nobleman, from whose house 
he wrote in October, 1579. How may these facts be recon- 
ciled, for they obviously cannot be passeed over in silence 
by anyone who desires to explore the nature of Spenser's 
political satire and its relation to the events of his life ? 

A natural suggestion that Leicester would not have read 
the poem carefully enough to see that the poet referred in 

" Harington, Nugae Antiquae, II, p. 18. 
■" Annals, p. 494. 

*> Fuller, Worthies of England, II, pp. 342-3 ; Froude, XI, p. 101. 
Fuller also gives the reason stated by Harington and Camden. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 307 

terms of praise to Grindal need scarcely be given serious 
consideration. Spenser's reference to Sidney's unfavor- 
able reception of The School of Ahuse, dedicated to the 
latter without permission — "suche follie it is, not to 
regarde aforehande the inclination and qualities of him to 
whome wee dedicate oure Bookes"^^ — indicates caution in 
selecting a fit recipient for the dedication of the Calender. 
This prudence he intended to exercise when he resisted the 
advice of Harvey to dedicate the poem to Leicester, on the 
grounds that the work was "too base for his excellent 
Lordship, being in Honour of a private Personage un- 
knowne, ... or the matter not so weightie, that it should 
be offered to so weightie a Personage : or the like".^' Now 
these letters first appeared publicly in the summer of 1580, 
when Spenser was about to leave for Ireland, and their 
contents may have been pruned for publication. At any 
rate, the poet's tone is here marked by wariness and by a 
desire to hint at, rather than name, matters known to his 
correspondent, and it is therefore probable that the real 
reasons which caused him to hesitate to offer his poem to 
Leicester arose from subjects therein treated which would 
have been unpalatable to the latter. The Puritan drift of 
the satire levelled at the Anglican policy of Burghley and 
his associates, the opponents of Leicester, and the flattering 
allusions in the October and November eclogues would 
certainly have pleased the Earl and would have been 
"weightie" enough to warrant a dedication. The praise 
of Leicester, in marked contrast to the lack of celebration 
of Sidney, indicates that the poem was first intended for the 
former. Why then did Spienser transfer the dedication 1 

The truth, to my mind, as I have already suggested in 
the discussion of the relation of the Shepherd's Calender 
to the Areopagus, is that Spenser came to find out, after 

*^ Harvey, WorJcs (Grosart), I, p. 8. 
« Ihid., p. 6. 



308 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

he had been a short time in Leicester's service, and after 
he had almost certainly written several of the eclogues, 
that Leicester had been, or was openly alleged to have been, 
the cause of Grindal's sequestration, and that he also 
regarded Lord North, who had married his brother's 
widow, as a close friend,^* the same Lord North whom the 
poet probably attacked in the September eclogue. Rather 
than defer his bid for fame, which would be best made in 
this highly composite work possessing so many advantages 
for the display of his talents, he emphasized the literary 
aspect of the poem by the dedication to a young man then 
regarded chiefly as a patron of men of letters, and not as a 
statesman or political leader. As I expect to show later, 
Spenser could hope for little from Leicester at the time 
when the Calender finally appeared, and perhaps he had 
good reason to suppose that Sidney would not concern 
himself greatly about matters relating to the private affairs 
of his uncle. Indeed the intimacy of Sidney with his 
uncle at this time (before 1580) is rather doubtful, for, 
although he was the nephew of the royal favorite, he 
received no favors at Court before 1581, beyond the enig- 
matical appointment as a gentleman-in-waiting to the 
Queen.^^ Neither did Leicester take him sufficiently into 
his confidence to require his presence at Wanstead in 
September, 1578, nor did he further Sidney's union with 
his step-daughter. Lady Penelope. At any rate, Spenser, 
probably through lack of tact or through faulty informa- 
tion, dedicated his work to the nephew of the Earl of 
Leicester, and thereby made a serious error in judgment, as 
I shall explain further on.^® 

'* North 's friendship with Leicester at this time is clearly prove'' 
by his presence at the secret wedding of the latter and the Countess 
of Essex, celebrated at Wanstead in September, 1578. 

** This position brought no salary. 

"Leicester's loss of favor (1579-80) also had an important bear- 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 309 

The application of this argument to the origin of Spen- 
ser's acquaintance with Leicester and Sidney is simply 
this: that the poet, in view of the anxiety to please his 
patrons to which he has fully testified in the letter of 
October 5 (16), 1579, would probably never have expended 
his poetical efforts on subjects which were disagreeable to 
Leicester after he had met him and while he was trying to 
win his favor.^^ The fact that he published these eclogues 
touching upon topics unwelcome to his patron in a work 
dedicated to Sidney probably arose from his unwillingness 
to injure the literary integrity of a poem by which he hoped 
to win fame and material prosperity, extenuated by the 
circumstance that none of the other poems upon which 
he had been working — i. e. the Dreames, the Legendes, 
the Court of Cupide, the "sonnetts", and "sondry others" 
— would display his talents as well as the Calender, even 
if any one of them had yet arrived at that state which 
would warrant publication. His desire to appear before 
the public, combined with other circumstances, overcame 
his sense of tact, and deadened misgivings on the subject 
of the allusions to Grindal and Lord North. 

Owing to the fact, therefore, that the July eclogue could 
not have been completed before June, 1577, the date of 
Grindal 's sequestration, the notoriety of Leicester 's enmity 
to the latter is a strong argument that Spenser could not 
have known Leicester and the Sidney family until the 

ing on the time of publication of this work. This relation will be 
treated at length in its proper place. 

"The parts of the Calender dealing with Grindal (eel. v, 1. 75; vii, 
11. 126, 157, 213-30) might have been easily suppressed without 
injuring the integrity of the poem, but not so the September fable, 
which presumably refers to Leicester's friend Lord North. In the 
ease of the former, the poet perhaps did not care to face the dis- 
agreeable charges which might have been laid at his door, provided he 
had ever thought of suppressing these views, such as deserting in the 
hour of need a former benefactor to himself and to the Puritans. 



310 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

summer of 1577 at the earliest. For placing this meeting 
still a year later there is, unfortunately, no actual proof, 
but, unless we are to suppose that Spenser encountered 
either Sidney or Leicester in some chance way on a visit to 
London, it is plausible to date the meeting from the prog- 
ress at Audley End, July 26-27, 1578.^^ On this occasion 
his friend Harvey, who knew Leicester and had hopes of 
being employed by him in some diplomatic capacity,^' 
probably introduced him to his future employer. After 
this event the conversation recorded in the June eclogue, 
which is interpreted biographically by E. K., took place, 
and Spenser, on the advice of his older friend, decided to 
leave his present occupation and to seek the favor of Lei- 
cester and Sidney, who had taken a fancy to him probably 
on account of his literary gifts. 

How the young poet had been engaged from the time that 
he left the University until the summer of 1578 is unknown. 
This period of his life has been identified with the story of 
Rosalind by his biographers, in whatever light each one 
may regard the attachment, and it seems certain that this 
conclusion is correct. In accordance with my interpreta- 
tion of the June eclogue as referable to Cambridge, and 
in accordance with the view that Rosalind was a lady of 
some social position in whose house Spenser was employed 
either as secretary or tutor,®" the logical theory of his ex- 
istence during these two years is apparent. If the state- 
ment that Rosalind was "a Gentlewoman of no meane 
house" (April gloss) is to be accepted literally, this lady 
probably belonged to a family of Cambridgeshire, or per- 

*^ Of the presence of either Leicester or Sidney in the neighborhood 
of Cambridge or Saffron Walden during the connection of Spenser 
with the University and the two years following, we possess no record. 

*° C/. Harvey, Works (Grosart), I, p. xxxix; Nichols, Progresses, 
II. pp. 111-4. 

°" This has already been stated in the article on Eosalind (cf. p. 
230). 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 311 

haps of one of the adjacent counties, which could be num- 
bered among the landed gentry. Her father may have 
been a knight or a baronet, but no higher in rank, for, if 
we are to accept the description of E. K., her family prob- 
ably did not possess nobility. From this point of view, 
among the families of Cambridgeshire which belonged to 
the landed gentry, it is worth while to speak of three. The 
first is the family of Cotton, who owned the manor of 
Landwade,®^ situated at a distance of sixteen miles from 
Cambridge, via Newmarket. The present head of this 
house was Sir John Cotton,^- who had married Isabella, 
the sister of Sir John Spencer of Althorpe. By her this 
knight had a family of four sons and three daughters, the 
names of the latter being Alice, Anne, and Sarah. Two 
of these daughters married, but whether before Spenser's 
residence at Cambridge is uncertain. Their father, at 
any rate, died in 1593. The other family to which I 
wish to refer is also a knightly one, that of the Allingtons 
of Horseheath Hall.®^ At the time of which I am speaking 
Sir Giles AUington was the head of this family, and, out- 
living both his eldest son Robert and his grandson Giles, 
was succeeded by his great-grandson Giles on his death in 
1586.^* Now the last-named was the son of Giles, who 
died Nov. 25, 1573,^^ by Margaret Spencer, eldest^*' daugh- 
ter of Sir John Spencer of Althorpe. Owing to a confusion 
in the Allington pedigree in the Visitation of Cambridge 

'^ Also spelt Lonwade and Landward. Camden calls it Lanheath, 

" His lineage, which was ancient, is given in the Visitation of 
Cambridge, 1575, and 1619 {Harl. Soc. Puhl, p. 22); cf. also The 
Topographer, III, p. 131. 

•* Also spelled Alington, Alyngton. 

** Burke, Extinct Peerage, p. 4. 

"^ Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica, IV, p. 36. 

*^ Baker, The History and Antiquities of the County of North- 
ampton, I, p. 109, and Collins, Peerage, I, p. 379, name her as the 
eldest of the six daughters. 



312 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

(pp. 15-16) the issue of this marriage is sometimes 
wrongly given.®^ Besides Giles, who succeeded to his great- 
grandfather's estates, two other children were born, John 
and Margaret. Their ages are established by their chris- 
tenings, viz. Giles on Sept. 18, 1572, John on Aug. 13, 1573, 
and Margaret on October 9, 1571.^* After the death of 
her husband, Margaret Spencer married an Edward 
Elrington of Carlton Hall in Cambridgeshire.^^ As a 
daughter by this second union was married on July 27, 
1602,^°** it is probable that this lady did not long remain 
a widow. Her husband has been confused with other 
Edward Elringtons, chiefly the one who lived at Wither- 
field or Wethersfield, Essex,"^ but his identity is set at rest 
by the marriage of their daughter, which took place at 
Carlton. Horseheath is about twelve miles south-east of 
Cambridge, while Carlton is about thirteen, and at the 
same time about four miles northerly from Horseheath."^ 
Now the heads of these three families of ancient lineage 
were all lords of the manors in which they lived, and were 

°' Blomefield, Collectanea Cantahrigiensia, p. 33, describes the monti- 
ment of Margaret, wife of Kobert Allington, on which are engraved 
the names of her progeny, some of whom had been recorded as 
children of Margaret Spencer in the Visitation. 

°' E. Clutterbuck, The History and Antiquities of the County of 
Hertford, II, p. 542. 

'^Visitation of Cambridge (Harl. Soc. Publ.), p. 41. 

""> Ely Epis. Bee., p. 278. 

^"^ Visitation of Essex (Harl. Soc. Publ.), p. 49, There were several 
Edward Elringtons living at this time, however (cf. The Genealogist, 
V, p. 231; Prerogative Court of Canterbury Wills, IV, p. 142; Mar- 
riage Licenses, London, 15S0-1610, in Harl. Soc. Publ., p. 148; Morant, 
Essex). E. Sims, Index to the Pedigree of Arms in Heralds' Visita- 
tions, gives three families of Elringtons in Essex circ. 1580-1600. 
Another came from Willesden, Middlesex. The name is by no means 
rare in Elizabethan documents. 

"^E. Carter, History of the County of Cambridge, pp. 151, 220. 
The AUingtons actually owned the parish of Horseheath. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 313 

therefore possessed of some wealth and influence in dis- 
tricts which lay at only a short distance from Cambridge. 
One of these gentlemen had married the sister of Sir John 
Spencer of Althorpe, whose family acknowledged the poet 
as kinsman, and the two others had been successive hus- 
bands of the same knight's eldest daughter. The origin 
of Edmund Spenser's acquaintance with the Althorpe 
Spencers and their acknowledgment of the relationship is 
not recorded. Perhaps, therefore, the suggestion may be 
made that it arose through those members of this family 
who lived near Cambridge, whose acquaintance the poet 
may have made during his residence at the University, and 
by any one of whom he may have been given employment. 
As I do not believe that the name Rosalind is an anagram, 
perhaps the original of the lady praised by the poet is to 
be found in Margaret Spencer, who, if not a "Widdowes 
daughter" circa 1576-8, was probably a widow. This, 
however, like all theories concerning the person of the 
poet's heroine, is mere surmise, and can never be rendered 
plausible to those who accept the word Rosalind as an 
anagram. Spenser, upon his graduation, might have found 
employment in many another family of the landed gentry 
near Cambridge. But, if the setting of the June eclogue 
has been rightly interpreted as referring to this locality, 
and if Rosalind was a real person of flesh and blood, who 
presumably lived within reach of Harvey either at Cam- 
bridge or Saffron Walden (c/. Dec. eel., 11. 155-6), the life 
of the poet may also be reasonably supposed to have been 
spent near Cambridge during the years 1576-8. 

Another argument in support of this theory is that none 
of the references in the various letters of Harvey (Letter 
Book) to Spenser which mention the meetings of the two 
friends are referable to a period earlier than circa Janu- 
ary 1, 1578-9. In his letter of April 7, 1580, Harvey 



314 spensee's shepherd's calender 

alludes to his AnticosmopoUta, which still remains ' ' neither 
an inche more forward, nor backwarde, than he was 
fully a twelve-month since in the Courte, at his laste 
attendaunce uppon my Lord there ".^°^ The expression 
"fully a twelve-month since" might be stretched to refer 
to the period about January 1, 1578-9, when Spenser 
presented Harvey with a copy of Howleglas.^^* No other 
allusion occurs which can possibly point to a meeting of an 
earlier date. Hence the conclusion arises that the sepa- 
ration of the two friends did not occur a long time before 
January 1, 1578-9, a fact which helps to account for the 
absence of letters from Harvey to Spenser before this 
year (1579), especially when the latter so eagerly de- 
manded news of the University.^°^ 

Certainly by December 20, 1578, when Spenser pre- 
sented Harvey with the above mentioned book, the poet 
was living in London, presumably engaged as some sort of 
a confidential secretary or diplomatic agent in the employ 
of the Earl of Leicester. Mr. Sidney Lee conjectures that 
"one of Spenser's chief duties while in Leicester's service 
was apparently to deliver despatches to Leicester's corre- 
spondents in foreign countries".^"® If the writer means 
that Spenser carried these despatches to foreign countries, 
and not that he merely transferred them to accredited 
agents of Leicester's foreign correspondents on their visits 
to Leicester House, the proposition seems plausible. At 
the time when E. K. sent the Epistle to Harvey (April 10, 
1579) the poet is mentioned as "being for long time furre 

'"'Harvey, Works (Grosart), I, p. 68. 

*** Harvey as a fellow of Trinity would be unlikely to desert his 
post during term-time. 

^'^ Op. cit., I, pp. 68-9: "But I beseech you, what Newes al this 
while at Cambridge? That was wont to be ever one great Question" 
(Harvey on April 7, 1580). 

'"'^Bict. Nat. Biog. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 315 

estraunged "/"■^ a statement which may mean that he had 
been sent on a mission to a foreign country by the Earl, 
his master.^°^ 

For some time previous to the winter of 1578-9 Leicester 
had been in close connection with William of Orange and 
other leaders of the religious revolt against Spain in the 
Low Countries. In fact, if the Queen had decided to 
adopt the Protestant policy favored by almost all of her 
ministers, an armed expedition was to have been sent to 
their aid of which Leicester would have been the com- 
mander. On December 18, 1577, we find Sir Edward 
Horsey writing his opinion to Davison, the English 
ambassador in the Low Countries, that "before Can- 
dlemas or shortly after" the latter would see '*my Lord 
of Leicester well accompanied" in the field against the 
Spaniards.^"^ Although his expectation actually remained 
unfulfilled until several years later (1585), Leicester evi- 
dently believed that he might be despatched at any moment, 
and consequently kept himself informed of the state of 
political matters in these Spanish provinces, chiefly through 
the medium of Davison, who was one of his proteges. 
Without tracing the wavering course of the Queen's policy 
in regard to the States of Holland and Belgium, it is 
enough to remember that, much to the disgust of her 
Council, she withdrew her support from them and required 
Alencon to give up his two months' campaign for their 
assistance by again dangling marriage proposals in his 
face (1578). Leicester, however, continued to keep in 
touch with those at the head of affairs in the Low Coun- 
tries, t. e. the Prince of Orange and Duke John Casimir. 
On December 10, 1578, during the temporary illness of the 

"^Ed. Herford, p. 8, 1. 24. 

'°* Lee, Diet. Nat. Biog. 

*"' Green, Cal. State Papers, Dom., Add., p. 523. 



316 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Queen, Leicester despatched Daniel Rogers/" a govern- 
ment diplomatic agent, on a mission to the Low Countries 
with instructions which he had signed on his own responsi- 
bility."^ At the same time we find him sending over 
another messenger, one Wilkes,"- and in the following 
winter still others, who announced or brought gifts to the 
Prince and Princess of Orange."^ For the visit of Duke 
John Casimir at the end of January (1579)^^* Leicester 
and Walsingham, who were now acting together in opposi- 
tion to Burghley, were responsible, and to prepare for this 
event several messengers had to be despatched to the Low 
Countries to make the necessary arrangements.^^^ 

It is evident, therefore, that Leicester's principal foreign 
business from the time of the Queen's progress at Audley 
End at the end of July (1578), until the Alengon marriage 
negotiations assumed primary importance in the spring of 
1579, was concerned with the Low Countries, of which he 
entertained hopes of one day becoming the sovereign. Ac- 
cordingly, it is by no means an unsafe guess that the young 
Spenser may have been occupied on a mission to these 
States in the interests of his patron at the time when 
his friend, E. K., speaks of him as "for long time furre 
estraunged". The idea of sending Harvey abroad, if 
we are to believe the latter 's statement in the Gratula- 
tiones,^^^ evidently came to naught, and the reason may 
have been that Leicester had found a more prepossessing 

""Daniel Eogers (1538-1591) had been employed several times 
previously on the business of the Low Countries. He was a friend 
of both Harvey and Spenser, especially of the former (cf. Worlcs, I, 
p. 107). 

^ Green, op. cit., pp. 336 ff. 

"^ Hid., pp. 385, 391. 

"* His visit to London lasted from January 22 until February 12. 

"^ Cal. State Papers, Spanish, 1568-79, pp. 644, 648.. 

^'Worlcs (Grosart), I, p. xxxtx. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 317 

man of high intellectual gifts who would reflect greater 
credit upon his patron.^^^ 

At all events the young aspirant for political advance- 
ment was once more in London shortly after the date given 
by E. K. (April 10, 1579), for the "long Westminster con- 
ference the verie last Ester terme","* to which Harvey 
refers in the postscript to his letter dated "the 10 of 
this present, and as bewtifull a sunnye daye as cam 
this summer — 1579","* took place in the same year.^^" 
Furthermore, Harvey speaks of Spenser as "de London in 
comitatu Middlesex, gentleman" (p. 121), where he prob- 
ably indulged in the pleasure of attending the play-houses 
along with some "lively copesmates" (p. 125), and this 
description indicates that his permanent abode then lay at 
the metropolis. During June he must have remained there, 
for Harvey desires him to "deygne the voutesafinge me by 
the nexte London karrier that comith downe to Midsomer 
fayer" (June 24) some "portion" of his writings.^-^ Of 
his whereabouts during the remaining months of the sum- 

"^ This journey, of course, could not have commenced until after 
December 20, 1578, the date in the copy of Rowleglas. 

"*Worls (Grosart), I, p. 124. 

"* Ibid., p. 120. 

'^ In this same letter Harvey writes as if he had not communicated 
with Spenser for a long time, an additional reason for supposing that 
the poet may have been abroad, where Harvey could not conveniently 
reach him. Cf. especially the following: "I still sende abroade 
amongste my frendes, according to my wontid manners, rather de- 
siring continuance of entire frendshipp and ould acquayntaunce by 
familiar and good fellowlye writinge than affecting the commenda- 
tion of an eloquente and oratorlike stile." (P. 119.) 

^^Op. cit., p. 131. The reference to Dr. Humphrey Busby (p. 128), 
who made various gifts to Trinity Hall, of which Harvey was then 
a fellow, and who died before July 1, 1580 (Cooper, Athenae, I, p. 
425), indicates that this letter was written in 1579. The time of year 
is established by the allusion to the Midsummer Fair, which took place 
at the period around Midsummer Day (June 24). 



318 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

mer we are ignorant, but it is likely enough that he re- 
mained in London, holding himself in readiness to depart 
for foreign climes on the business of his patron. His 
letter of October 5 (16) of that year indicates that Lei- 
cester was then thinking of despatching him abroad: 

" But by my troth, I have no spare time in the world, to thinke 
on such Toyes, that you know will demaund a freer head, than 
mine is presently, I beseeche you ... let me be answered ere I 
goe: which will be, (I hope, I feare, I thinke) the next week, 
if I can be dispatched of my Lorde. I goe thither, as sent by 
him, and maintained most what of him : and there am to employ 
my time, my body, my minde, to his honours service/'^^a 

Whether this expectation was fulfilled is unknown, but 
in view of the best contemporaneous information the prob- 
ability is that Spenser remained in London, In his reply 
of October 23, Harvey remarks that "as for your speedy 
and hasty travell : me thinks I dare stil wager al the Books 
and writings in my study, which you know, I esteeme of 
greater value than all the golde and silver in my purse, or 
chest, . . . that you shall not . . , bee gone over Sea, for 
al your saying, neither the next, nor the nexte weeke".^^^ 
Those of the poet's biographers, like Mr. Lee and Mr. 
Hales,^^* who prefer to treat the Latin hexameters of 
Spenser contained in the letter of October 5 (16) as auto- 
biographic, are inclined to believe that the poet visited not 
only France and Italy, but even Spain, the Caucasus, and 
the far East.^-^ Such a contingency, however, seems alto- 
gether unlikely. Between November 1, 1579, and April 
10, 1580, when he wrote from Westminster, Spenser could 
never have had time to travel to these far distant lands, 

*=° Harvey, Worls (Grosart), I, pp. 16-17. 

'=^ Op. cit., p. 26. 

"'Dicf. 'Nat. Biog. 

^'"'■Cf. Harvey, Worlcs (Grosart), I, p. 15. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 319 

Indeed the noticeable imitation of Horace in these Latin 
verses, as well as the answering comments of Harvey upon 
the wanderings of Ulysses and Aeneas/'® sufficently show 
that the two friends were indulging in rather pedantic 
pleasantries on the prospect of Spenser's departing "over 
sea ' '. If he attended in person to the obtaining of a license 
for the Shepherd's Calender on the following December 
5, as would seem most natural, there would have been 
scant time for employment on any foreign mission. ]\Iy 
theory of Spenser's relations with Leicester during the 
winter of 1580, which I shall now present, also implies that 
the poet did not depart at this time from his native land. 
More than one writer has noticed the difference in tone 
and in subject of Spenser's two letters which have come 
down to us, the first dated October 5 (16), 1579, and the 
second April 10, 1580. In the earlier letter the poet alludes 
to his patrons, Leicester and Sidney, to the "sweetnesse" 
which he had ''already tasted" from their patronage and 
the necessity to guard against "over-much cloying their 
noble eares", to his "late beeing with hir Maiestie", to his 
association with Sidney and Dyer in the project of reform- 
ing English poetry, and, finally, to his proposed journey 
abroad, to which reference has just been made. Although 
literary matters occupy the larger part of this letter, it is 
clear that Spenser hoped for political advancement at the 
hands of his powerful patron, Leicester, He warns Harvey, 
that "it sitteth with you now, to call your wits and senses 
togither, . . . when occasion is so fairely offered of Esti- 
mation and Preferment", and reminds him that "whiles 
the yron is hot, it is good striking, and minds of Nobles 
varie, as their Estates ".^-'^ He is evidently elated at his 
connection with Leicester, Sidney, and Dyer, and his desire 

"« Ibid., pp. 26-7. 
'=" Ibid., p. 7. 



320 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

for diplomatic employment becomes unmistakably appar- 
ent at the conclusion of his letter. By April 10, 1580, how- 
ever, in a period of six short months, Spenser's aspirations 
became somewhat changed. Writing no longer from 
"Leycester House", but from the vicinity of the Court at 
"Westminster, he discusses the systems of Drant, Harvey, 
and Sidney for the importation of classical metres into 
English poetry. Of projects he is still brimful, but they 
are now entirely literary, and among his unpublished 
works he mentions his Epithalamion Thamesis, his 
Dreames, his Dying Pellicane, his Faery Queene, and his 
Stemmata Dudleiana. On political and diplomatic matters 
he says never a word, and he fails to mention his patron 
Leicester by name, although the last sentence in the post- 
script undoubtedly hints at him: "of my Stemmata 
Dudleiana, and especially of the sundry Apostrophes 
therein, addressed you knowe to whome, must more advise- 
ment be had, than so lightly to sende them abroade," etc.^^* 
Now the nature of this reference to his lost poem in 
honor of the Dudleys and their relations, which has been 
substantially identified with The Buines of Time, proves 
the fact that the poet intended to be extremely cautious 
before he published it. The passage in question is also 
important when taken in connection with a remark made 
by Harvey in his letter of May 9, 1580,^-* which has been 
previously quoted for another purpose : ' ' Imagin me to 
come into a goodly Kentishe Garden of your old Lords, or 
some other Noble man," etc."** This "old Lord", who is 
a nobleman, I take to be the Earl of Leicester, who owned 
estates in Kent, as we have seen, and to whom Spenser 
failed to refer openly in his letter of April 10, 1580. With 

^=» Ibid., p. 39. 

^^ ' ' Nono Calendas Maias ' ', ibid., p. 99. 

"^ Ibid., p. 81. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 321 

these allusions the poem of VirgiVs Gnat, first published 
in the volume of Complaints (1591), but described as 
"long since dedicated to . . . the Earle of Leicester, late 
deceased" — i. e. in September, 1588 — should be taken 
under consideration. This poem has recently been used to 
support the theory that Spenser lost the patronage of Lei- 
cester on account of his attack on Burghley and the Alencon 
marriage in the Mother Hubherd's Tale, and that his 
sorrowful complaint to this nobleman in the dedicatory 
sonnet prefixed to it refers to the latter 's withdrawal of his 
favor/^^ This theory, I believe, explains only a part of the 
situation, and should be amplified in order to include the 
Shepherd's Calender. 

The idea of grouping these poems together is justifiable, 
for, if not originally composed at the same period, they 
were certainly sent forth within a short time of each other. 
It is known that the latter was published some time be- 
tween December 5, 1579, and March 25, 1580,^^2 ^nd, 
although no date for the composition of the first draft 
of the Mother Huhberd's Tale can be positively stated, it 
is probable that it began to be circulated in manuscript in 
the summer or fall of 1579. Greenlaw, in addition to his 
interpretation of the second episode in the latter as an 
attack on Burghley and the supporters of the French 
match, the negotiations for which reached a climax in Oc- 
tober, 1579, adduces in support of a date circa 1579-80 
the references to the plague (11. 7 #.), which was prevalent 
during the summer of 1577 and which lasted in some parts 

"^E. A. Greenlaw, Publ. Mod. Lang. Ass. (1910), XXV, pp. 535- 
61. "There can also be no doubt that the reference in the sonnet, as 
well as the story of the poem itself, is to Mother Eubherd's Tale and 
to the punishment which Spenser suffered therefor" (p. 558). 

^In the prevalent manner of reckoning time the new year began 
on March 25. 

22 



322 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

of England for two years,^^^ to the universal hatred of the 
French, which reached its height at this time, and to the 
Queen's discovery of Leicester's marriage with the 
Countess of Essex: 

"But his late ehayne his Liege unmeete esteemeth." 
Of this event the Queen had been informed about July 1, 
1579,^^* and of Spenser's reference to it Greenlaw justly 
remarks that it "would lose its point had it not been 
written soon after Simier revealed" this news.^^^ 

Indeed this last allusion, when taken with another cir- 
cumstance, renders it altogether likely that the first draft 
of the Mother Huhherd's Tale, which contained a thinly 
disguised attack upon Burghley and his foreign policy, was 
circulated anonymously in manuscript before the licensing 
of the Calender (December 5, 1579). The other circum- 
stance concerns the publication of The Gaping Gulph 
by John Stubbs, which was a rather sharp attack against 
the French match. This pamphlet appeared in August, 
1579,^^® and a proclamation by the Queen dated September 
27^^^ soon followed, prohibiting its possession under pain 
of death.138 rpj^g "great efforts" used "to collect all the 
copies, and to discover the author", which were instituted 
at the end of September, resulted in the trial of Stubbs, the 
author, William Page, the publisher, and Hugh Singleton, 
the printer, at Westminster on October 13. Through the 

^ Cf. Lemon, Cal. State Papers, pp. 556, 560, 587, 603, etc, 

^ Letter of Queen of Scots, in Labanoff, V, dated July 4, quoted 
by Froude, XI, pp. 172-3. 

"" Op. cit., p, 551. Simier conducted Alengon 's negotiations, and 
by disclosing to the Queen the secret marriage of Leicester he hoped 
to remove the latter 's influence against the match. 

"'Art. Stubbs, Diet. Nat. Biog.; Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 111. 

"' Lemon, Cal. State Papers, Bom., p. 633. This order may have 
been issued four days eariier (of. following reference). 

^^Cal. State Papers, Spanish, 1568-79, p. 700. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 323 

Queen's influence the three were sentenced to lose their 
right hands, in spite of the fact that many lawyers ob- 
jected to the constitutionality of the indictment. Single- 
ton was pardoned, but Stubbs and Page suffered the full 
weight of the sentence on Tower Hill on the third of the 
following month. Although it has been alleged that Stubbs 
was a friend of Spenser,^^^ the basis for this statement is 
probably to be found in a list of the former 's friends given 
by Strype, which contains the name Spenser,^*" to be sure, 
but which refers only to members of Lincoln's Inn. The 
true significance of the whole incident in connection with 
Greenlaw's interpretation of the Mother Hubherd's Tale, 
and especially in connection with the reference to Lei- 
cester's marriage, is that the poet would have been un- 
likely to circulate a work of this kind after the time of 
the Queen's proclamation on September 27. Even the 
anonymity of the authorship of The Gaping Gulph had 
not prevented the ultimate ferreting out of the unfortu- 
nate writer. With Leicester in disgrace, on account of his 
marriage to the Countess of Essex and on account of his 
opposition to the Alencon match, upon which the Queen 
seemed to have set her heart, Spenser would hardly have 
dared to circulate his satire even anonymously in manu- 
script, after the proceedings against Stubbs had been insti- 
tuted. The printer. Singleton, moreover, obtained the 
licensing of the Calender on December 5, and Spenser 
must have therefore had a deeply personal warning in the 
trial of the unfortunate men. For these reasons I am in- 
clined to believe that the second episode in the Mother 
Hubherd's Tale was circulated in manuscript some time 

"* Hume, Cal. State Papers, Span., 1568-79, p. 700, note. 

^*'' Annals, II, pt. 2, p. 305. Stubbs visited Cambridge on March 
21, 1570, and again on August 22, 1576 (Cooper, Athenae, II, p. 111). 
It is therefore possible that he may have met Spenser on one of these 
occasions. 



324 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

during the summer of 1579, that is, before the end of Sep- 
tember,^''^ and on this theory it preceded the Calender in its 
appearance before the world.^*^ 

If the preceding hypothesis is correct, it is clear from the 
poet's letter of October 16 that he remained in Leicester's 
service after the circulation in manuscript of the Mother 
Huhherd's Tale, and that, if the latter was the cause of 
his loss of Leicester's favor and ultimately brought about 
his transference to Ireland, as Greenlaw contends, the 
results which it achieved did not immediately appear. 
Other circumstances, I believe, played an equally important 
part in the change of relations between Spenser and his 
patron, and decidedly influenced the poet's departure to 
Ireland. These were probably produced by the Shepherd's 
Calender, and bear directly upon the political conduct and 
opinions of the Earl of Leicester. 

In his interpretation of the Mother Huhherd's Tale 
Greenlaw makes the following summary: "Leicester, find- 
ing himself in a tight place, sacrificed his young admirer 
(Spenser) as well as a fine hound^*^ to propitiate angry 
deities" (p. 557). He accordingly has explained that the 
complaint in Virgil's Gnat alludes to Spenser's exile in 
Ireland "because of the service he rendered his patron", 
which "was the warning" conveyed in the Mother Huh- 
herd's Tale against the French match and the policy of 

"^C/. Nashe, Foure Letters Confuted (1593), II, pp. 212-3, and 
Harvey, Foure Letters (1592), pp. 164-5. The former certainly 
seema to refer to a period antedating 1591 in his notice of the "dis- 
pleasure" kindled against the M. E. T., and this must have been 
before Spenser left for Ireland in 1580. 

^*^ Another point in favor of the composition of the Tale in 1579 is 
the allusion to the building operations of Burghley (11. 1173-4), which 
were "still progressing" in September, 1578 (Hume, Burghley, p. 
327). This allusion would have had less point in 1591, when these 
operations had been long finished. 

^^ A gift to Burghley, cf. Lemon, Cal. State Papers, Dom., p. 672. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 325 

Burghley thereto related (p. 559). This view implies the 
idea that Leicester remained in disfavor until the departure 
of Spenser for Ireland (August 12, 1580), for otherwise he 
would have been willing, other matters left aside,^** to con- 
tinue his patronage of the young author, whose attack on 
the French marriage he had not frowned upon as late as 
October 16, 1579, during a period when he was certainly 
in deep disgrace.^^^ Reference to contemporary documents, 
however, will prove that Leicester regained the Queen's 
confidence long before the poet sailed for Ireland. With- 
out entering into all the details of his loss of favor through 
the Queen's anger, which broke out in the beginning of 
July, 1579, when he feigned sickness at Wanstead,^*^ on 
account of Simier's report of his secret marriage, and 
which was prolonged through the summer and autumn and 
into the succeeding winter, it will be enough to discover 
when the Queen restored him to his wonted place in her 
estimation. As near as it is now possible to tell, this seems 
to have occurred in March, or April, 1580. On April 14 
the French ambassador delivered a message from Henry 
III to the Queen, proposing to join their two countries in 
war against Spain. After she had received the ambassador, 
she discussed his message alone with Leicester, and she 
subsequently ''ordered the matter to be kept secret, as she 
desired that no one but himself and Cecil should hear of 
it".^*^ It is sufficiently clear from this that Leicester must 

^" Matters contained in the Calender. 

^*^Cal. State Papers, Spanish, 1568-79, pp. 681-2, 692, 693, 709; 
Cal. State Papers, Venetian, 1568-80, p. 623; Hume^ The Courtships 
of Queen Elisabeth, chap. ix. 

^^Cal. State Papers, Span., 1568-79, pp. 681-2. 

"' Cal. State Papers, Spanish, 1580-6, pp. 24-5. Cobham, the Eng- 
lish ambassador at Paris, evidently thought that Leicester's disgrace 
had come to an end before, for, in a letter dated March 12, he com- 
municated to Leicester, for the Queen 's knowledge, the proposed plans 
of AlenQon for entering the Low Countries. He also requested Lei- 



326 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

have been restored to favor, and by the beginning of June, 
at any rate, his policy, ably supported by Walsingham, 
was once more in the ascendant.^*^ If he had therefore 
wished to continue his patronage towards the young poet, 
he was certainly once more able to do so. 

Of course, most of Spenser's biographers have con- 
jectured that he owed his appointment as secretary to Lord 
Grey de Wilton primarily to the influence of Leicester,^** 
and that the latter therefore did not withdraw his patron- 
age. This currently accepted view, however, requires a 
revision at the present day. At the time of Grey's appoint- 
ment to the Lord Deputyship of Ireland he and Leicester 
were bitter enemies. About the first of April, 1580, the 
Queen, who was fond of playing off enemies against each 
other, had commanded Leicester to inform Grey "to put 
himself in readiness for Ireland ".^^*^ Talk of his con- 
jectured appointment had been rife as early as February, 
1578,^°^ and was currently accepted by Irish officials in 
November, 1579.^^^ Grey, however, who had been in the 
Queen's bad graces for several years, chiefly on account of 

cester to further a suit of his, a petition unlikely if the latter were 
still out of favor {Cal. State Papers, Foreign, pp. 187-&). 

^^ Cal. State Papers, Spanish, pp. 33-4. This is a reference to 
Mendoza's letter to Philip of June 11. Further proofs of Leicester's 
restoration to favor before the departure of Spenser to Ireland may 
be found in ibid., p. 37 ; Cal. Eat field MSS., ii, pp. 328, 329. Cf. also 
Hume, Burghley, p. 342, who mentions the secret conferences of 
Elizabeth and Leicester with the Prince of Conde in June, 1580. 

"° Cf. especially Todd, I, p. xlviii ; Collier, I, p. xlviii ; Hales, p. 
xxxi; Grosart, I, pp. 123-4; Lee & Hales, Diet. Nat. Biog., etc. 

^^Cal. State Papers, Irish, 1574-85, p. 216. Grey had been seri- 
ously considered for this post in 1571 (cf. Cal. State Papers, Span., 
156S-79, p. 297; Cal. State Papers, Irish, 1509-73, pp. 444, 446, 449, 
458). 

"' Sidney Papers, I, p. 240. 

^^^Cal. Carew MSS., 1575-88, pp. 175-6. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 327 

his well-known dissatisfaction with her policy/^^ and also 
because of his attack upon Mr. John Fortescue in Chancery- 
Lane/^* for which he lay imprisoned in the Fleet from 
December 1, 1573, until May 9, 1574/^^ complained in an 
answer, dated April 7, of his "often warnings and Her 
Majesty's flat answer that he should not be employed". In 
response to another communication from Leicester of the 
same nature he replied (May 12), marvelling "that Her 
Majesty will receive no excuse", and recalling "the circum- 
stances of his former dispatch, when Leicester had been 
sitting on the form in the Privy Chamber at Green- 
wich ".^^"^ Clearly neither the character of his proposed 
employment nor the channel through which it was com- 
municated offered any relish to his palate. He who will 
glance through the Calendars of the Irish State Papers and 
of the Carew MSS. during the two years of Lord Grey's 
Deputyship will discover for himself that Grey looked for 
support from Burghley^^^ and Walsingham, not from Lei- 
cester. In these there are notices of numerous letters from 
Grey to the two former, but only of four to the latter.^^® 

"^ The Spanish partisans of Mary Stuart at the time of the Nor- 
folk conspiracy (1571) included his name in a list of those noblemen 
upon whom they thought they could depend (Froude, X, p. 158i). 

^" Lemon, Cal. State Papers, Bom., p. 470. Fortescue subsequently 
enjoyed the favor of the Queen, and became Master of the Ward- 
robe a few years later (cf. ibid., p. 617, under date of January, 1579). 
The quarrel between the two, who were neighbors in Buckinghamshire, 
resulted from a dispute over certain hunting privileges, in October, 
1573 (ibid., pp. 467-8). 

^^Acts of the Privy Council, 1571-75, pp. 158 and 236. 

^^ Cal. State Papers, Irish, 1574-85, p. 222. 

*" Cf. Murdin, passim. 

^'"Cal. State Papers, Irish, 157^-85, pp. 292, 293, 294. One of 
these is only an enclosure of Sir Nicholas Malby 's report to Leicester, 
and all three are confined to a period of ten days (March 13-23, 
1581). In another letter (ibid., p. 328, Nov. 6, 1581) Grey refers 
to his answer to a memorial of questions sent to the Queen through 
Leicester. 



328 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Grey evidently thought that Leicester was thwarting his 
policy, for on two occasions he asked Walsingham to show 
communications directed to the latter to this nobleman.^^^ 
If further evidence is required, one can turn to the corre- 
spondence addressed to Leicester, which is included in 
these same collections, by two of his partisans, Sir 
Nicholas Malby, Governor of Connaught, and Geoffrey 
Fenton, Secretary of the Irish Council, who kept their 
patron informed of the doings of the Lord Deputy and of 
their opinions on the same.^®° 

It is true that the relationship between Grey and Lei- 
cester, to which Sir Henry Sidney referred in his long 
letter to the former (September 17, 1580),^®^ has been used 
to prove that the two could not have been entirely at 
odds,^^^ but chiefly, it would seem, by those ignorant of its 
exact nature. It consisted simply of this: the notorious 
Sir Edmund Dudley, Leicester's grandfather, had married 
the Lady Elizabeth Grey, daughter of Sir Edward Grey, 
Baron L'Isle, who was fourth in descent from Eoger de 
Crrey, younger brother of Henry, Lord Grey de Wilton. 
Now Arthur, Lord Grey de Wilton, was seventh in descent 
from the aforesaid Henry, and, as the Earl of Leicester 
was the grandson of the Lady Elizabeth Grey, he was also 
seventh in descent from Roger de Grey.^"^ Leicester and 
Lord Grey were, therefore, seventh cousins, and this is 

^=» Ibid., pp. 302, 311. 

^Tor Malby, cf. the Carew MSS., passim; Cal. State Papers, 
Irish, 1574-85, pp. 316-329. For Fenton, cf. especially Cal. State 
Papers, Irish, 1574-85, pp. 319, 328i (to Burghley), 329 (to same), 
330, 335, 337, 340, etc. Both these officials came over to England 
for instructions during these two years. 

^'^ Sidney Papers, I, p. 282. 

^^ Todd, I, p. xlviii. This biographer has made the blunder of 
stating that "to Sir Henry Sidney . . . Lord Grey was allied". 

^^For this pedigree, cf. Burke, Extinct Peerage; Collins, Peerage; 
Lipscomb, History of BucMngham; Banks, Extinct Baronage, etc. 



i 



BIOGRAPHY OP SPENSER 329 

the sum total of their blood relationship.^®* It is use- 
less to suppose that either one of them would have been 
drawn together by such a distant connection. Far from a 
supposition of this kind the fact remains that at the time 
of which we are speaking "Leicester was a bitter enemy of 
Grey's".^®^ Although Leicester had been restored to the 
jQueen's favor a few months before the poet's departure 
to Ireland, the appointment of the latter as secretary to 
Lord Grey was not, in all probability, obtained through the 
assistance of his former patron. "We must therefore search 
for another reason for this change in the relations of Spen- 
ser and Leicester, which could not have been entirely due 
to the Mother Euhherd's Tale, for of this, even when he 
lay under the frown of the royal displeasure in the fall of 
1579, Leicester had not disapproved. 

This reason, as I have already intimated more than once, 
is to be found in the Shepherd's Calender itself, wherein 
Spenser touched upon certain matters displeasing to the 
Earl of Leicester and, probably on this account, to Philip 
Sidney also. These concerned the praise of Grindal in the 
July eclogue and the attack on Lord North in the Septem- 
ber eclogue. The cause of Leicester's dislike of these allu- 
sions has been elsewhere stated more specifically, and needs 
no further elaboration.^''^ At any rate, some time after 
December 5, 1579, and before March 25 of the next year, 
the long-withheld Calender appeared, and the young poet 
made a determined bid for fame in the first work of an 

^" Ambrose Dudley, Earl of Warwick, married Anne Whorwood, the 
grand-daughter of Sir Edward Grey, and, therefore, his own cousin. 
The first wife of Edmund Sutton, Lord Dudley, Leicester's second 
cousin, was Lady Catherine Bruges, Lord Arthur Grey's first cousin. 
These alliances, however, are distant (cf. Collins, Peerage, VI, pp. 
720-1). 

^•^ Hume, Burghley, p. 374. 

"« Cf. supra, pp. 305-8. 



330 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

ambitious nature published by him.^*'^ At the time when 
it appeared Leicester still lay under a cloud, and he had, 
no doubt, thought it wise to withdraw his patronage for 
a while from the young satirist of the Mother Huhherd's 
Tale, although he evidently had not disapproved of the 
sentiments expressed therein as late as the middle of Oc- 
tober, 1579. Certainly in the spring of 1580, when Harvey 
referred to "a certain famous Booke called the newe 
Shephardes Calendar "^*^^ (May 9), Spenser was no longer 
in the service of Leicester, his "old Lord".^®® 

This view of the change in their relations is borne out 
also by the contents of the poet's letter of April 10, 1580, 
in which he has nothing to say of his former diplomatic 
employment, of visits to the Court, nor of meetings and 
conversations with Sidney.^^^ Of the latter, he simply 
remarks that he had received from him certain Rules and 
Precepts of Arte formerly "devised" by Drant, a pro- 
ceeding which must have occurred no later than January, 
for in the early part of that month Sidney had presented 
his celebrated letter to the Queen in opposition to the 
Prench match,^^^ and, on account of that, had been forced 
to go into retirement at Wilton.^^^ Dyer, to be sure, he 
mentions, but only in connection with the latter 's approval 
of Harvey's Satyricall Yerses.'^'^^ Above all, there is 
the aforesaid allusion to the Stemmata Dudleiana, which 
he now felt it advisable to withhold from publication. 

^'" The earlier Visions found in Vander Noodt 's collection can hardly 
be said to represent a complete work of an ambitious nature. 

'"Harvey, WorTcs (Grosart), I, p. 90. 

""Ibid., p. 81. 

'"It is noticeable that the letter is dated from Westminster, not 
from Leicester House, as before. 

"' Sidney Papers, I, pp. 287-92. 

"■Fox Bourne, pp. 182, 186, 209-10; Addleshaw, pp. 150-2, 168- 
70; Lee, Diet. Nat. Biog. 

^'^Op. cit., p. 37. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 331 

Truly he no longer enjoyed the patronage of Leicester, 
and he would therefore have to depend upon his poetry 
for the acquisition of wealth and fame, as Harvey told him 
(May 9).^^* Finally, the cold praise bestowed by Sidney 
on the Calender in the Apologie, while partially due to a 
pronounced difference of opinion in regard to literary inno- 
vations, was also, no doubt, evoked in part by the portions 
of the work disagreeable to his uncle. 

Spenser, in an endeavor to assist the party of his patron 
Leicester, had the misfortune to circulate his attack against 
the French match and the policy of Burghley just at the 
time when this patron lay under a heavy cloud, and when he 
was therefore either unwilling or unable to obtain for him 
political preferment. Failing of help in this direction, the 
poet was thrown back upon his own resources, and put 
forth a poem which he had long withheld from publication 
on account of allusions which might possibly offend his 
patron, and which was the only one in his possession then 
completed. This work, touching as it did upon matters 
which would be disagreeable to Leicester if discovered, the 
poet could not, or would not, alter, for fear of injuring its 
literary integrity, a proceeding for which he no longer felt 
the necessity on account of the loss of his former patrons. 
The dedication to Sidney still remained, who may not have 
shared his uncle's feelings towards Grindal and North, 
and who therefore may have good-naturedly accepted the 
dedication without inquiring too closely of the contents. 
In other words, the poet intended to make what capital he 
could out of his connection with former patrons. 

When Leicester returned to power about April 1, 1580, 
he felt it inexpedient to countenance any more Puritan 
attacks against the policy of Burghley, and in Spenser's 
ease, moreover, found a specific reason for this determina- 

"* Op. cit., p. 93. 



332 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

tion, in the allusions to matters repugnant to him. In this 
respect his attitude did not vary from his usual practice 
towards employes who had outlived their usefulness.^^'' 
Accordingly, the interpretation of Virgil's Gnat and its 
dedicatory sonnet to the Earl of Leicester advanced by 
Greenlaw must be amplified to include the Shepherd's 
Calender, which attacked the domestic policy of Lord 
Burghley, whereas the former work attacked his foreign 
policy, but which, unfortunately, touched upon matters dis- 
agreeable to Leicester.^^^ 

In conclusion, however, one point remains unsolved. If 
Leicester did not obtain Spenser's preferment as secretary 
to Lory Grey, through what channel did the poet secure 
this position? The most obvious answer is that the com- 
bined influence of the Sidneys was responsible. Indeed 
Sir Henry, who did not share his brother-in-law's anti- 
pathy to Lord Grey de Wilton, communicated with the 
latter on matters relating to the government of Ireland. 
One of these letters, which indicates a frank and warm 
desire to assist his successor in every way possible, has been 
preserved, and this contains a long list of Irish officials and 

""C/. Cal. Hatfield MSS., i, p. 350; Cal. State Papers, Bom., 
Add., under year 1584, p. 138; Leycester's Commonwealth, passim. 
Of the latter work no less an authority than Walter Eye has written: 
"The ability of this book is shown by its popularity. It would be 
hard to say how many MSS. there still are of it. . . . Its literary 
merit is very conspicuous, and the knowledge the anonymous writer 
had of the secret history of his times is very remarkable" (The 
Murder of Amy Bohsart, app. xii), 

"" It is not altogether improbable that the celebrated passage in 
the Mother Euhberd's Tale on the delays of suitors at Court (Globe 
ed., p. 521) may not refer to this period of Spenser's life, when 
Leicester cast him aside. The praise of Leicester in his later works, 
such as The Buines of Time, was probably instigated by the desire 
for patronage at the hands of the Countess of Pembroke and her 
husband, and therefore does not touch upon his sorrow at the loss of 
his former patron's favor. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 333 

prospective applicants for service in Ireland, whom Sidney 
recommended to Grey's favorable notice.^^^ Unfortunately 
the name of Edmund Spenser does not appear. From our 
conception of the chivalrous nature of Philip Sidney's 
character, it is hard to believe that he followed the foot- 
steps of his uncle in turning adrift the young poet in whom 
he had taken a keen interest. Yet, although it is pleasant 
to think that he endeavored to assist Spenser, it is improb- 
able that he succeeded, for he, as well as his father, re- 
mained under a cloud until some time after Spenser's 
departure on August 12, 1580.^^* 

The real solution may be just this. Arthur, Lord Grey 
de Wilton, was not only interested in poets but also in 
matters relating to the University of Cambridge. To the 
poet George Gascoigne, of whom E. K. makes mention, 
Lord Grey had acted as patron from about the year 1564,^'^^ 
and it is evident that he felt strongly drawn towards young 
men of literary ability.^^^ On the fifth of September, 1578, 
he wrote to Burghley from his residence at Whaddon in 
favor of a scholar who desired to remain in Cambridge, 
praying the Lord Treasurer ' ' to commend him to the Vice- 
Chancellor and the Masters and Fellows of Colleges ".^^^ 
Grey, moreover, was strongly inclined in favor of the Puri- 
tans and the Reformed religion. The young Cambridge 
scholar, poet and Puritan as he was, must have therefore 
been immediately acceptable to Grey, and, leaving the Sid- 

^"^ Sidney Papers, I, pp. 279 #. It is dated Sept. 17, 1580, and 
mention is therein made of other letters which had passed between 
Grey and Sidney (p. 279). 

"* Cf. especially Fox Bourne, pp. 210-11. Philip did not return to 
Court until October, 1580 (p. 213). 

"'Art. Gascoigne, Diet. Nat. Biog. 

*^ Collier, Spenser, I, p. xlviii. Turbervile was also patronized by 
Grey. 

«^ Cal. Hatfield MSS., ii, p. 199. 



334 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

neys aside, there are three plausible ways in which Spenser 
could have been brought to the notice of his future patron. 

The first arises from Lord Grey's residence at Whaddon, 
Buckinghamshire, where he held the keepership of the 
Chase, besides filling the position of Lord Lieutenant of the 
eounty.^^^ Now Whaddon had been the birth-place of 
Richard Cox, Bishop of Ely,"^ who is plausibly repre- 
sented as the Roffy of the September eclogue, and who may 
have employed Spenser in some capacity during the years 
1576-1578.^^* That he preserved an interest in his native 
village is sufficiently attested by two donations in his will, 
dated April 20, 1581, one "to the poor of Whaddon 40s", 
the other "to the poor of Nashe in the parish of Whaddon 
4Qg>' 185 These gifts (and the one recorded in the foot- 
note) are all the more remarkable, for they are the only 
charitable ones in his will relating to places outside of his 
diocese. Bishop Cox, therefore, from his connection with 
Whaddon, probably enjoyed some measure of acquaintance 
with Lord Grey, and may have recommended Leicester's 
rejected follower to his notice. 

The second way in which Lord Grey and Spenser could 
have been brought together may be found in a connection 
which existed between the families of the former and of 
Sir John Spencer of Althorpe. A sister of the latter, 
Anna, had married Sir John Goodwin of Woburn and 
Upper Winchendon, a man of considerable importance in 

^^ Lemon, Cal. State Papers, Dom., p. 376, etc. 

''^ Cooper, Athenae, I, p. 437; Diet. Nat. Biog. Bithop Cox had his 
first education at the Benedictine priory of St. Leonard Snelsworth, 
near Whaddon. 

"* Cf. eel. ix, 1. 176. 

'** Cooper, Athenae, I, pp. 442-3. He also made a donation of £5 
"to the poor in Buckingham town", which lay only five miles dis- 
tant from Whaddon. 



BIOGRAPHY OF SPENSER 335 

the affairs of the county of Bucks.^^® From this marriage 
sprang Sir Francis Goodwin, who married Lord Grey's 
eldest daughter, the Lady Elizabeth. The latter, there- 
fore, became the first cousin by marriage of Lady Carey, 
Lady Compton, and Lady Strange, to each of whom the 
poet dedicated a poem, and all three of whom he has cele- 
brated in Colin Clout's Come Home Again. Perhaps from 
his presence at Court in Leicester's service during the years 
1578-9 he may have formed a friendship with any one of 
these three ladies,^^'' even if he had not met some members 
of their family during the two years immediately follow- 
ing his departure from the University,^^^ as I have else- 
where shown to be plausible. One of these ladies, or 
indeed any member of the Spencer of Althorpe family, 
may have recommended their young relative to the favor- 
able notice of Lord Grey through the medium of their 
own near relative by marriage, Sir John Goodwin. It is 
probable that the marriage between Elizabeth Grey and 
Francis Goodwin had not yet taken place, but their ages 
in 1580 entirely warrant the assumption that this union 

^«»This gentleman occupied the office of high sheriff of Bucks in 
29 Eliz. (Lysons, Magna Brit., I), which his father had filled in 4 
Eliz. In addition to the manors of Upper and Nether Winchendon, 
where he usually resided, he possessed the two manors of Woburn, 
and those of Cippenham, Cuddington, and Waddesden in the same 
county (Lysons, op. cit., pp. 532, 547, 655, 669, 671). 

"' Lady Carey was married as early as 1575 at any rate (Clutter- 
buck, op. cit., Ill, p. 181), Lady Mountegle in September, 1575 
{Cal. Hatfield MSS., ii, p. 110), and Lady Strange some time in 1579 
(Diet. Nat. Biog.). 

"*In the dedicatory preface of the Mother Huiherd's Tale (1591) 
to Lady Compton he speaks of "the humble affection and faithful 
duetie, which I have alwaies professed, and am bound to beare to that 
House, from whence you spring". This certainly appears referable 
to a connection which had lasted for more than one year and a half, 
and therefore must hark back to a time previous to the poet 's original 
departure for Ireland. 



336 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

had been arranged by that time, in accordance with the 
usual contemporaneous custom of early betrothals, espe- 
cially between persons of rank.^^" Through this intended 
connection, and the friendly association which it implies 
between Lord Grey and Sir John Goodwin, two of the most 
prominent inhabitants of Bucks circa 1580, we possess an- 
other plausible theory for Spenser's preferment by Lord 
Grey. 

The third manner in which this meeting may have 
occurred, while less plausible than the others, is still worthy 
of mention. In the year 1557 a man by the name of Ed- 
ward Kirk secured title to the manor of Stoke Hammond 
in the county of Bucks, and this manor lay within four or 
five miles of Whaddon and its Chase.^^" Now the name 
Edward Kirk or Kirke is seldom encountered, strange to 
say, at this period of English history,^**^ and it is therefore 
just possible that the owner of this place may have been 

**• Francis Goodwin was baptized on October 13, 1564, in the parish 
church at Woburn (T. Langley, History of the Hundred of Des- 
iorough, p. 465 [the Sir Thomas, his father, is a misprint for Sir 
John]; W. Berry, Pedigrees of BucTcinghamshire Families, p. 71). 
Elizabeth Grey was the only child of Lord Grey by his first wife, the 
natural daughter of Lord Zouche of Haryngworth, and her father 
did not remarry until after 1573, at which time Lord Eussell, the 
first husband of his second wife, was alive {cf. Diet. Nat. Biog., art. 
Francis Eussell, 2nd Earl of Bedford). The reference, among the 
god-children of Queen Elizabeth, to the christening of a child of 
Lord Grey de Wilton's must therefore designate her, and the date of 
this is September 29, 1565 (The Genealogist, n.s., II, p. 394). 
Francis Goodwin and Elizabeth Grey were, then, nearly sixteen and 
fifteen years of age respectively at the time when Spenser left for 
Ireland. 

^™ Lipscomb, The History and Antiquities of BucMngham, IV, p. 
359. 

"* In the Index to Chancery Proceedings, 1558-79, I, p. 234, I meet 
with the name of Edward Kirke as the plaintiff in a suit for recovery 
of debt. Neither his town nor his county is given. I have not met 
with other contemporary examples of this name. 



BIOGRAPHY OP SPENSER 337 

the father or near relative of Spenser's commentator, and 
that on account of this residence near Whaddon the latter 
and his family may have known Lord Grey and may have 
been able to say a good word in Spenser's behalf. Con- 
versely, we find that Spenser's friend was instituted on 
May 26, 1580, to the rectorship of the parish of Risby, 
Suffolk, on the presentation of Sir Thomas Kytson,^^^ ^j^q 
was the uncle of Lady Carey.'^^^ Spenser and Kirke may 
therefore have each owed something in their preferment 
to the efforts of the other. 

With these alternatives for the usual theory of Spenser's 
advancement to the position of secretary to Lord Grey 
by the Earl of Leicester and the Sidneys, which I have 
shown strong reason for doubting at this stage of Spen- 
serian criticism, the present investigation naturally comes 
to a close. While, of course, the nature of Spenser's 
attacks upon the policy of Burghley probably prolonged 
the unfortunate influence of the Shepherd's Calender upon 
his material prosperity, by blocking his preferment until 
the death of the Lord Treasurer (1598), this influence 
came to be merged with other circumstances after the time 
of the poet's departure with Lord Grey to Ireland, and 
therefore lies outside the scope of the present work. The 
result of the foregoing theory tends to prove that Spenser's 
association with Leicester and Sidney was short-lived — that 
it lasted, at most, from August, 1578, until circa January 
1, 1580; that he failed to regain their patronage, — lost at 
first through their forced disavowal of the Mother Hub- 
herd's Tale at a time when they were in disgrace, — because 
of certain parts of his satire, which touched upon matters 
disagreeable to them ; and that he obtained his Irish prefer- 
ment through the plausible intercession of friends or rela- 

*'^ Grosart, Spenser, III, p. cxi. 

^^ Visitation of WarwicTcshire (Harl. Soc. Publ.), pp. 285-6; Diet. 
Nat. Biog., article Kytson (Kitson). 
23 



338 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

tives, perhaps of both. While he no doubt bitterly 
regretted at a subsequent period the continuance of this 
employment in a strange land, there is little reason to sup- 
pose that he did not eagerly accept it in the summer of 
1580, in the same manner as many other men of higher 
birth sought for and accepted similar preferments in that 
country.^®* His poetry and his previous diplomatic em- 
ployment had failed to gain him political advancement in 
England; he therefore probably welcomed the chance to 
hew out his fortune in Ireland under the auspices of "the 
good Lord Grey". 

*" The Irish State Papers are full of notices of suits for employ- 
ment in Ireland during these years, which often came from men of 
noble blood. For some examples, cf. Cal. State Papers, Irish, 
1574-85, pp. 240, 241, 252; Acts of the Privy Council, 1580-1, pp. 
115, 323-4; Hid., 1581-2, pp. 114, etc. 



APPENDIX A 



Mr. Greenlaw's Theory 



The only attempt to explain in any detail the meaning 
of Spenser's political and ecclesiastical satire in the Shep- 
herd's Calender has been lately made by Mr. E. A. Green- 
law in an article which deals with various aspects of this 
poem.^ His interpretations of the February, May, July, 
and September eclogues seem to have been dictated more 
by the poet's supposed following of the pseudo-Chaucerian 
Plowman's Tale than by the influence which the religious 
struggles of the age exercised in the formation of his politi- 
cal opinions. In this respect Greenlaw has summarized his 
position : " it is in the fact that Spenser endeavored to copy 
what he considered to be the ideals and teachings of 
Chaucer that we find the reason for his discipleship, not 
in matters of detail".^ 

Now this Tale, combined with the portraits of the Monk, 

^Publ. Mod. Lang. Assoc. (1911), XXVI, pp. 419-51. 

^ This theory of discipleship, which Spenser himself of course 
admits (eel. ii, 11. 91-3, 98-100), Greenlaw has been inclined to press. 
Elsewhere he remarks that "the influence of Chaucer on the Calen- 
der is very great" (p. 440), that "the poems in the Chaucer canon 
of that period" furnished "Spenser's most immediate model" (pp. 
427, 444), and that "it is in the Plowman's Tale that we have the 
most important native influence on the ecclesiastical eclogues" (p. 
442). Discipleship is one matter, the use of models another. Cer- 
tainly Spenser may be regarded as the disciple of Chaucer in the 
composition of moral tales as well as in other ways, but that the 
Plowman's Tale in any specific sense was Spenser's model for his 
ecclesiastical satire, any more than numerous other writings of fhe 
fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries which attack a ruling 
order of Churchmen, is entirely hypothetical. 

339 



340 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

the Friar, and the Parson in the Prologue to the Canter- 
bury Tales,^ has been applied by Greenlaw to explain the 
purport of Spenser's five "Moral" eclogues.* The key to 
the meaning of the Calender he believes to lie in these two 
lines of the Epilogue : 

" To teach the ruder shepheard how to feede his sheepe, 
And from the falsers fraude his folded flock to keepe." 

His interpretation, moreover, depends to some extent on 
what he calls "the cumulative effect" of Spenser's satire, 
which, he claims, steadily increases in vehemence and 
directness in the course of the first four of these eclogues. 
The latter are thus bound together as part of a systematic 
attack, after the manner of the Plowman's Tale. He 
himself has summarized his view as follows: " 'February' 
begins somewhat cautiously with regrets for the loss of the 
sturdy old religion, brought to -ruin by the corrupt customs 
which had grown up about it, and inveighs against the 
pride and overweening of the Anglican Briar; 'May' and 
'July' compare the true religion of Chaucer's Parson with 
the evil life of the monk, and warn the Puritans against 

* The Tale of Meliboeus, the Parson 's Tale, the translation of 
Boethius, the satire on priests in the last division of the Bomance 
of the Sose, the Pilgrim's Tale, the Testament of Love, and so forth, 
have also been cited to show that the Elizabethan Puritans regarded 
Chaucer "as a religious reformer" (p. 442); they are not employed 
specifically to explain Spenser's satire. 

* His introductory criticism of these is in some respects erroneoi J. 
For instance, he remarks (p. 428): "all these poems are alike in 
certain essential respects: they are in the irregular verse supposed to 
be imitative of Chaucer," a statement which is, of course, true 
neither of the divided fourteener metre of the "July" nor of the 
six-line stanzaic form of the "October". That "they abound in 
dialectal forms" by no means distinguishes them from the other 
eclogues in the Calender. The "October", at any rate, probably 
contains a far smaller number of these "forms" than either the 
"August" or the "March". 



Greenlaw's theory 341 

ambition and against the Wolf; in 'September' the poet 
reaches his most direct teaching, warning the churchmen to 
put an end to their greed and quarreling lest the Wolf 
again seize England".^ This indicates the nature of his 
theory, the various portions of which it is expedient to take 
up briefly in connection with individual eclogues. 

The allegory of the February eclogue is described by 
Greenlaw as three-fold: ''on the surface ... is the com- 
parison between youth and age {i. e. in the persons of the 
shepherds Cuddie and Thenot) ; then there is the compari- 
son between the ill-considered, violent love characteristic 
of youth and the more sober view characteristic of matu- 
rity; all this leads to the main purpose, to represent the 
way in which, despite worthy elements, the old religion, 
degraded by superstition, meets a well-deserved ruin and 
is supplanted by the Anglican form, which in turn deserves 
destruction for its emptiness and overweening".® In this 
view the Oak stands for the Catholic religion, the Briar 
for the Anglican Church, and the Husbandman for the 
English People. That a certain relation exists between the 
Oak and the Catholic religion is plausible, as I have pre- 
viously shown, on account of the lines quoted by Green- 
law taken in conjunction with the gloss which begin: 

" And often crost with the priestes crewe," 

(1. 209) 

This relation, however, is capable of being pushed much 
further, and is only "on the surface referable" to the 
Catholic religion in England. 

To a certain extent this theory of the February fable 
conflicts with the one which I have advanced. After due 
consideration the following objections seem to me pertinent. 
Greenlaw represents Spenser as lamenting the decay of the 

' Op. cit., p. 436. 
» Op. cit., p. 429. 



342 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

Catholic religion under the symbol of the Oak, a point of 
view which clashes with the general idea, accepted by 
Greenlaw, that Spenser was a Puritan, and with the fact 
that he has allowed E. K, throughout the commentary of 
the Calender to interpret the satire as attacks upon the 
Catholics, their Church, and their religion. The inter- 
pretation of Greenlaw is vague, to be sure, for he identifies 
the Oak only in a general way with the "ancient religion". 
A man like Spenser, however, who had passed through the 
midst of the ecclesiastical struggles in Cambridge would 
not have been apt to juggle with vague allusions to the 
"ancient religion". To the Puritans the Catholic religion 
of any age after the first three centuries, when Papal 
additions had changed the regiment of the primitive 
Church, was an object of hatred. Spenser would not have 
been rendering very important services to his patrons and 
his party by occupying his talents with regrets over that 
' ' ancient religion ' ' which the Puritans were then so busied 
in condemning from every point of view. 

Another serious objection can be lodged against this 
elucidation of the February fable. Wliat warrant is there 
for supposing that it describes an ecclesiastical state of 
affairs at all? The "argument" of the May eclogue pro- 
claims the fact that ' ' under the persons of two shepheards, 
Piers and Palinodie, be represented two formes of pastoures 
or Ministers, or the Protestant and the Catholique". The 
discussion which precedes the fable, with the exception of 
the account of the May-day festivities (11. 1-36), is entirely 
taken up with matters relating to the lives of ' ' shepheards ' ' 
(clergymen), and the fable of the Fox and the Kid is 
directly applied by Piers to prove the truth of his asser- 
tions (11. 170-1). On its conclusion, the ecclesiastical 
aspect of this tale is fully recognized by Palinode (11. 308- 
10). Similarly, the July eclogue is described as "made 
in the honour and conunendation of good shepheards, and 



Greenlaw's theory 343 

to the shame and disprayse of proude and ambitious Pas- 
tours" ("argument"). Here again the application of the 
brief fable at the end is ushered in by a long discussion on 
religious topics, principally concerning the virtues of the 
Biblical shepherds in contrast with the corrupt dealings 
of their vicious successors of the present day. Also in the 
"September" "the abuses . . . and loose living of Popish 
prelates" are mentioned in the "argument", and the con- 
dition of the Church forms the entire subject of conversa- 
tion introductory to the fable of Roffy. In the February 
eclogue, on the other hand, there is absolutely not the 
slightest reference to ecclesiastical matters in the discussion 
of Thenot and Cuddie which precedes the fable. In the 
fable itself the only allusion of this kind appears in the 
description of the Oak : 

" And often erost with the priestes crewe, 
And often halowed with holy- water dewe : " 

(11. 209-10) 

If Spenser, therefore, attacked the Anglican Church under 
cover of this fable, he adopted a method entirely at vari- 
ance with those pursued elsewhere in the Calender, where 
the general connection of his satire with Church affairs is 
definitely established. 

Finally, the theory advocated by Greenlaw fails to throw 
light upon the political convictions of Spenser and his rela- 
tion to the Puritans. He gives the reader who is unfa- 
miliar with the contents of the Oak and Briar fable an 
erroneous idea by the repetition of his assumption that 
Spenser was giving expression to wistful regrets for the 
loss of the Catholic religion.'^ If we except two paren- 
thetical utterances of doubtful applicability (11. 196, 198), 
sorrow over the destruction of the Oak does not appear. 
It is true that the poet sympathizes with the Oak, but only 

' Op. cit., pp. 431, 435, 436, 449. 



344 SPENSER 'S shepherd's CALENDER 

because he wishes to emphasize the arrogance of the Briar. 
The last eighteen lines of the fable conclusively prove that 
Spenser's main design consisted of an attack on the Briar. 
My point, therefore, is that by constant repetition of the 
conception that the poet is regretting the loss of the ancient 
religion in the person of the Oak, Greenlaw subordinates 
the chief purpose of the fable, i. e. the satire on the Briar,^ 
and in that way produces a wrong impression of the story 
related by Spenser. 

For these reasons, therefore, the theory advanced by 
Greenlaw for the February eclogue seems to me based on 
a misconception of the poet's methods of satire and on a 
failure to interpret the incidents of the Oak and Briar 
fable according to the relative value assigned them by 
Spenser. In regard to the May and the July eclogues, on 
the other hand, the brief remarks which he has made do 
not in general conflict with my explanations.® His meth- 
ods, however, are not entirely consistent, for, whereas he 
considers the fable of the Fox and the Kid as *'a warning 
to Protestant England to beware of the insidious treachery 
of the Catholics" (p. 431), he readily accepts the usual 
interpretation of the story of the Eagle and the Shell-fish 
as describing a particular transaction. Each tale, it is 
worth while to remember, is narrated as an event which 
had already occurred (eel. v, 11. 170-1; vii, 11. 215-17).^<> 

The same criticism applies to his theory of the September 
fable of Roffy and Lowder, which he interprets as a warn- 
ing to the Puritan leaders "that the Catholics, if not 
watched, will yet regain control ".^^ Again Greenlaw gives 

'Of course Greenlaw has mentioned this aim (cf. p. 429). 

' Greenlaw 's remarks on these eclogues seem to me to offer very 
little which has not previously been stated. 

" While it is, of course, plausible to interpret the May fable as a 
warning, reasons for departing from Spenser's statements of actual 
fact should be given. Greenlaw gives none (c/. p. 431). 

" Op. cit., p. 434. 



Greenlaw's theory 345 

an entirely erroneous impression of the contents. That the 
part of the eclogue which precedes the fable refers to 
matters in actual existence, we know from the remark of 
Hobbinol : 

" Better it were a little to f eyne, 
And cleanly cover that cannot be cured : 
Such ill, as is forced, mought nedes be endured." 

(11. 137-9) 

Similarly, Diggon and Hobbinol in turn speak of Roffy, a 
shepherd of their acquaintance, with whom Colin Clout 
(Spenser) is in some way connected (11. 170-9). In regard 
to the tale of Roffy, E. K. remarks that it "seemeth to 
coloure some particular Action of his". Now Greenlaw, 
who connects the first part of the conversation with an 
existing condition of affairs, disregards these last facts. 
While he is perfectly willing to identify the "Wolf of this 
fable with the Catholics, he has nothing to say of the iden- 
tities of Roffy and Lowder. Even, therefore, if we could 
accept his elucidation as a "specific reference ... to the 
Jesuit mission of 1578-1580 'V^ ^e has failed to take into 

^ Op. cit., p. 437. Chronology opposes the truth of this theory. 
English statesmen remained in ignorance of the Jesuit campaign 
against England until 1580 (cf. Froude, XI, pp. 185-92; Lingard, 
VIII, pp. 170-1, etc.; Campbell, I, p. 421). Priests from the semi- 
naries at Rheims and Douay had been coming into England since 
1574 (Campbell, I, p. 419, et al.), and orders were issued for their 
apprehension by the Council in 1578 (Acts Pr. C, 1577-8, pp. 317, 
348, 400, 403, 426). The first of these orders here noted the editor 
of the Acts erroneously marked as referring to the Jesuits, but 
this was obviously a mistake, for the order in question has nothing 
to say of the Jesuits, and is similar to many others issued in the 
previous years of Elizabeth's reign for the apprehension of wander- 
ing or " massing" priests, or of the seminarists. On April 13, 
1579 (Cal. Hatfield MSS., ii, pp. 249-52), Burghley drew up a de- 
tailed memorandum of the perils which then beset England; of the 
most insidious danger of all, the Jesuit invasion, he had nothing to 



346 Spenser's shepherd's calender 

account the actual incidents of the tale as Spenser de- 
scribed them. 

The remainder of Mr. Greenlaw's remarks upon the 
Shepherd's Calender offers scarcely any points of contact 
to the various theories developed in this work, and a dis- 
cussion of them would therefore be alien to my purpose. 
His misconception of historical fact, his failure to account 
for various matters in Spenser's fables which obviously 
demand explanation, and his method of selecting, and 
tendency to dwell on, only those points which happen to 
suit his own theory, have prevented him from giving either 
a complete or a logical explanation of Spenser's satire. 

say. Indeed, the first record of any information which he received 
on this subject, and of which we possess a record, is found in a letter 
from Cobham, ambassador at Paris, dated Feb. 20, 1580 (Cal. State 
Papers, Foreign, 1579-80, p. 158). Knowledge of the Jesuit cam- 
paign as an organized part of the foreign plot against England which 
was denied to the Protestant leaders, could hardly have been acqmred 
by Spenser at the time when he composed the Calender. 



INDEX 



Abuses, Church, denounced by 
Cartwriglit and the Puritans, 
24-25 

Academic disputes in Cambridge, 
30-38 

Accretions, " Learned," do not 
abound in Calender, 270; Her- 
ford on, 270-73 

Act of Supremacy, The, 2-3 

Act of Uniformity, The, 2-3; 
strictly enforced, 4; cause of 
split between Puritan and 
Anglican, 19' 

Admonition to the Farliament, 
An, 23, 200; four editions of, 
in two years, 200 

Advowsons bought and sold, 10 

Alcyon, name for Arthur Gorges, 
165 

Aldrich, Thomas, refused to take 
degree of B.D., 34 

Algrind, anagram for Grindal, 
164 

Allingtons, The, of Horseheath 
Hall, 311-12 

Alliteration, E. K. objects to use 
of, 177 

Ameto, Boccacio's, 100 

Anabaptists, The, denied au- 
thority of Queen and bishops, 
81 

Anagrams, 164 

Anglican and Puritan defined, 
16 n. 52; no difference in doc- 
trine between, 16; separated 
by views on discipline, 17, 19, 
156 



Anglican Church, regarded as one 
step removed from the Catho- 
lic, 19; distinctive characteris- 
tics of, denounced by Cart- 
wright, 21, 24-25; abuses of 
the, most glaring in Aylmer, 
100 

Anglican ecclesiastics. Palinode's 
specious defence of, 75; Piers' 
condemnation of, 75-76; some 
Puritans on the, 76-77 

Anglicans, Church authorities, 
mostly, 31; opposed by Puri- 
tans in the University, 36 

Answer to the Admonition, and 
Defense, by Whitgift, 24, 33 

Apostolic Church, Praise of the 
shepherds of the, 77-78 

Appropriations, Grindal on, 125 

Archaisms, Use of, defended by 
Spenser, 269; criticised by 
Sidney, 269-70 

Areopagus, the. The Shepherd's 
Calender and, 257-86 

Areopagus and Fleiade, J. B. 
Fletcher on, 260-61; similarity 
in, 280 

Artegal, for Arthur Grey, 164 

Ascham on study of Plato, 263 

Astrophel, an elegy on the death 
of Sidney, 244, 255 

Aubrey, John, on Eosalind, 209; 
not a reliable authority, 209; 
erroneous statement of, regard- 
ing Spencer, 288 

Auder or Awder, Persons bear- 
ing the name, 136-37 



347 



348 



INDEX 



Aylmer, Bishop, 3 n. 3; notorious 
for despoiling Church prop- 
erty, 6-7; alluded to in July 
eclogue, 44; on adultery in 
clergymen, 75; satire against, 
in July eclogue, 99; the shep- 
herd Morrell, 99, 102; account 
of, 100-2; disgust against, 
102; charged Puritans with 
seeking spoils, 111; symbol of 
"lordship" and pomp of 
bishops, 151; to Burghley on 
Wilcox, 301; relations of 
Wilcox and, parallel the 
Thomalin-Morrell quarrel, 203 

Bacon, , University proctor, 

opposed new statutes, 32 

Bacon, John, sold advowson 
granted by Nicolas Bacon, 10 

Bacon, Sir Nicolas, accused of 
procuring spoil of the Church, 
123 

Baker, Philip, Provost of King's 
College, expelled, 141 

"Banck," the bishop's throne, 
102-3 

Bardic notion of the poet, 262, 
263-65; Thomas Lodge on, 
264-65 

Bedford, Earl of, patron of the 
Puritans, 17; married his 
daughter to a Catholic, 18 

Beza in the vestment controversy, 
20 

Biography of Spenser (1576- 
1580), 286-338 

Bishoprics, Appointees to, 3 n. 3; 
made the most of their op- 
portunities, 4-8; kept vacant 
to secure revenues to the 
Crown, 11-12; buying of, 105 



Bishops transferred to richer 
sees, 11-12; called "imps of 
Antichrist," 25; held respon- 
sible for Church corruption by 
the Puritans, 74 

Blast against the Government of 
Women, A, by John Knox, 
answered by Aylmer, 101 

Blatant Beast, The, by the Jon- 
sonian supposition stands for 
the Puritans, 157; a fling at 
the Martinists, 159 

Bonyfelowe, John, examined for 
slanderous words of Leicester 
and Burghley, 62 

Book of Common Prayer com- 
pared to the "Popish dung- 
hill, the mass-book," 25 

Bourne, H. E, Fox, on the Areop- 
agus as a club, 259-60; pur- 
pose of Sidney's Apologie, 260 

Boyle, Elizabeth, Influence of 
Spenser's love for, 162 

Brere, The bragging (Burghley), 
64-65 

Briar, the, Speech of, an attack 
upon some courtier, 48 ; " prim- 
rose of all his land," 49; 
stands for Burghley, 50-51; 
the fable a satire upon Burgh- 
ley, 51-52; the attacks of, 65- 
67; attack on the, in form of 
a moral, 69-70 

Britomart, for Britain, 164 

Brooke, Lord, member of the 
Areopagus, 259 

Browne, Nicolas, forced to re- 
tract, 34 

Browne, Eobert, proteg4 of 
Richard Greenham, 195 

Browning, John, committed to 
the Tolbooth, 33 



INDEX 



349 



Buck, P. M., Jr., on Ambrosia 
Sidney as Dido, 235-37; on 
spelling of name Spencer, 291; 
on meeting of Spenser and 
Sidney, 302-5 

"Bulles of Basan," The, cour- 
tiers and lay patrons of bene- 
fices, 122-23, 130 

BuUinger in the vestment contro- 
versey, 20 

Burbon, for Henry IV, 164 

Burghley, Cecil, Lord, Seizures of 
Church property by, 8; plan of, 
for transfer of bishops, 12; on 
readers in churches, 15; and 
the Cartwright-Whitgift strug- 
gle, 21-22; Chancellor of Uni- 
versity of Cambridge, 22; first 
statesman of the realm, 30; 
referred University statutes to 
a commission of bishops, 32; 
pointed to abuses in the 
Church, 37; represented by 
the Briar, 51; grounds for 
Spenser's dislike of, 52-53; 
hated by the Puritans as Chan- 
cellor of the University, 52-53; 
relations of, to the fall of 
Norfolk, 57-61 ; Leicester 's 
influence against, 59-60; dis- 
covers Norfolk's complicity in 
the conspiracy, 61 ; blamed for 
the death of Norfolk, 62-63; 
corrupt practices of, 74; 
satirized as a fox, 90-91; un- 
popularity of, 94; pedigree of, 
96-98; claimed relationship to 
the Devereux, 97; and the Fox 
had the gout, 97 n. 124; 
singled out for attack, 98; 
a BuUe of Basan, 123; attack 



on, 151; hostility of Spenser 
to, 152 

Bury St. Edmund's in Suffolk, 
" Prophesyings " established 
at, 27 

Cains, Dr., attacked by Puritans 
and Anglicans, 35 

Calender, the Dedication of, to 
Sidney, 243; part of the liter- 
ary program of the Areopagus, 
260; not certain, 261; Spen- 
ser's motives in writing, 261 

Calidore, the Knight of Cour- 
tesy, Sir Philip Sidney, 247 

Cambridge, University of, a hot- 
bed of Puritanism, 20, 30; 
academic disputes in, 30-38; 
petition against new statutes 
of, 31-32; Anglican authori- 
ties atj denounced, 109; North 
unpopular at, 143-45 

Cambridge disputes, Influence of 
the, on Spenser's satire, 122 

Camden, W., on Grindal's dis- 
grace, 306 

Canterbury, Archbishop of. Cor- 
ruption of courts of, 114r-15 

Carey, Elizabeth, like Kosalind, 
230-31 

Cartwright, Thomas, denounced 
corruptions in Anglican Church, 
21 ; expelled from his fellow- 
ship, 22; went to Geneva, 23 
returned to England, 23 
wrote Second Admonition, 23 
Beply and Second Beply, 24 
contentions of, 24-25; popu- 
larity of, at Cambridge, 30-31; 
on names and titles, 78; on 
unlearned ministry, 110^11 ; 
on the Archbishop of Canter- 



350 



INDEX 



bury's court, 114-15; on va- 
cant parishes, 119-20 

Cartwright-Whitgift struggle, 
The, 21-25, 30 

Cartwright 's Beply quoted, 104 

Casimir, Duke John, Visit of, 
to London, 316 

Casket letters, Norfolk staggered 
by the, 58 

Cathedral churches called "dens 
of loitering lubbers," 25 

Catholic nobility supporting Nor- 
folk, 58, 59 

Catholic powers, How Elizabeth 
conciliated the, 4 

Catholic prelates displaced by 
Protestant, 3 

Catholics in the majority, 2 

Cecil, see Burghley, Lord 

Cecil, David, grandfather of 
Burghley, 96 

Cecil, Elizabeth, Proposed mar- 
riage of, with Robert Devereux, 
92, 93; wife of Thomas Went- 
worth, 93 

Cecil, Thomas, arrested for sedi- 
tious words, 62 

Chaderton, Dr. Wm., complained 
of seditions at Cambridge, 21 

Chapman, Edmund, member of 
Cartwright 's party, 21 

Charillis, anagram for Elizabeth 
Carey, 164 

Chaucer, Imitation of, by Spen- 
ser, 267; Greenlaw on Spen- 
ser's discipleship of, 339-40 

Chichester, Diocese of, Dis- 
orders in, typical, 14-15 

Child, F. J., adopted Halpin's 
theory of Eosalind, 211 n. 14, 
225-26; on Eosalind, 225 

Church, Dean, on the Puritanism 



of Spenser, 154-55; on the 
Areopagus 259 

Church, Ealph, Guess of, on 
Eosalind, 209-lQ 

Church, Attempt to reform the, 
from within, 26 

Church dignitaries. Corruption of, 
120, 151; ambition and phi- 
losophy of, 151 

Church history. Epitome of pre- 
Christian, 103 

Church livings bought and sold, 
10, 106 

Church property preyed upon by 
royalty, 10-12; fleecing of, 74; 
alienation of, 121-22; traffic 
in, by courtiers, 122-25; spoil 
of, by the ecclesiasts, 151 

Church of England, Constitution 
of the, 3; policy of the, in 
hands of Queen, 3 

Cicero, Latin distich of, trans- 
lated by Spenser, 168-69 

Clark, William, expelled for 
Clerum sermon, 33 

Classical metres. Experimentation 
with, by the Areopagus, 261 

Classics, Imitation of the, 266-67 

Clergy, Pride and arrogance of, 

114, 116, 152; an ignorant and 
corrupt, 116-18> 151 

Clergy, higher. Abuses among 
the, 107-9 

Clergy, lower. Miserable state of 
the, 13-14; ignorance of, 15; 
immorality among, 16; oppres- 
sion of the, by the bishops, 114, 

115, 151-52 

Clout, Colin, Only reference to, in 

eclogues, 42-43 
Cloute, Colin, E, K. on use of 

name, 173 



INDEX 



361 



Colm Clout's Come Home Again, 
Eeferences to Sidney in, 245 

Commissions to search out con- 
cealed lands, 12-13 

Common Prayer Book of Edward 
VI revived, 2 

"Complaints," Poems in, com- 
posed years before publication, 
40 

Cooper, Bp. of Lincoln, drew up 
instructions for * ' prophesy- 
ings," 27 

"Coronall," E. K. on, 49-50 

Corruption, Ecclesiastical, 5-8, 
38, 73-74; of the clergy, 16, 
103-11 

Corruption of patrons, 151 

Corydon, appellation of Thomas 
Watson, 165 

Cotton, The family of, 311 

Courtiers, Greed of, 8-12; satire 
on, in the Briar's speech, 48; 
corruption of, 105; rapacity 
of, 118; traffic of, in church 
livings, 122-25 ; depredations 
of, on Church property, 152 

Coventry and Lichfield, Bishopric 
of, withheld from presentation, 
11 

Coverdale, Miles, lost his prefer- 
ment in the vestment contro- 
versy, 20 

Cox, Dr. Eiehard, expressed 
views advocated by the Puri- 
tans, 37; on ignorance of the 
clergy, 119; two attempts at 
spoliation of, 131-35; by Hat- 
ton, 132; by Roger, Lord 
North, 132-35; the name 
Eoffy and, 135; his brother-in- 
law Awder and name Lowder, 
136-37; career of, 138-39; 



reasons for Queen's dislike of, 
139, 140; the person meant by 
Eoffy, 139, 150; connections 
of, with University of Cam- 
bridge, 140-42; justified, 142; 
Spenser's motives for defend- 
ing, 143 ; incidents in persecu- 
tion of, by North, appropriate 
to fable, 145-49 ; a continual 
member of the Ecclesiastical 
Commission, 150; defence of, 
152; may have recommended 
Spenser to Grey de Milton, 334 

Craik on November eclogue, 41 

Cuddie and Colin, 41, 45 

Cuddie, name of interlocutor in 
three eclogues, 178^-81; E. K. 
and Harvey on, 179; not Spen- 
ser, 179-80; intended for 
Kirke, 180; hypothesis, 181 

Dacres estates, Norfolk's claims 
to the, 58 

Daniel, Eose, N. J. Halpin on, 
210-12; not known, 212 

Baphnaida, The, 70 n. 66 

Daphne, name for Douglas 
Howard, 165 

Davie, Diggon, 112, 113; enu- 
merates four abuses, 113-16; 
recites what he has heard from 
four classes of critics, 118; 
two theories of identification 
of, invalidated, 188; return of, 
from "farre countrye" (Lon- 
don), 189; description of, 189- 
90; the ' ' dialecte and phrase of 
speache, ' ' 190-91 ; Richard 
Greenham fits the description 
of, 192-96; connecting-link 
between names, 196-97 

Dee, Dr. John, refers to an E. K. 
(Edward Kelly), 176 



362 



INDEX 



Dering, Edward, friend of Nor- 
folk, 55; on "lordship," 79 

Devereux, Robert, earl of Essex, 
in Burghley's household, 92- 
93>; marriage of, with Eliza- 
beth Cecil, proposed, 92, 93; 
the Goat and the Kid, 93-94; 
perils to, from Burghley, 94; 
represented by the Kid, 96-96 ; 
descended from Anne Wood- 
ville, 97 

Devereux, Walter, first Earl of 
Essex, Death of, 91, 93, 94; 
wife of, the widow represented 
by the Goat, 93-4 

"Dialecte and phrase of 
speache," E. K. 's comment on, 
190-91 

Dido, E. K. on, 41-42, 232-42 

Dinley, Eose, Eosalind as, 213; 
without foundation, 216 

Discipline, Church, Question of, 
separated Anglican and Puri- 
tan, 17 

Downham, North's efforts to 
seize, from Cox, 133-34, 146- 
47 

Drant, Thomas, Translation of 
Ars Poetica by, 264; used 
Plato as authority, 281 

Drayton, on Eosalind, 209 

Dryden, John, on Eosalind, 209 

Du Bellay's Deffence and Sid- 
ney's Defense, Fletcher on, 266 

Dudley, Eobert, Illegal grants to, 
8 

Dyer, Edward, member of the 
Areopagus, 259, 260 

Dyneleys, the Charlton, Pedigree 
of, 214 

Eagle, the, and the Shell-fish, 



The fable of, 99; Herford's 
elucidation of, 111-12 

Ecclesiastical Commission, Puri- 
tan ministers suspended by an, 
19-20; Cox a continual mem- 
ber of the, 150 

Ecclesiastical corruption, 5-8, 38 

Ecclesiastical eclogues composed 
at the University, 94 

Ecclesiastical policy of Elizabeth, 
The, 1-16, 38 

Eclogues, The political and eccle- 
siastical, 38-162 

Elisa, Queen Elizabeth, 44 

Elizabeth, Ecclesiastical policy 
of, 1-16, 38; revoked conceal- 
ment commissions, 13; in the 
fable of the Oak and the Briar, 
46; the "Husbandman," 50- 
51 ; sends Norfolk to the Tower, 
59; negotiations for marriage 
of, with the Duke of Anjou, 
60; hesitated over execution of 
Norfolk, 61 ; refused to hear 
Norfolk, 67 ; objected to public 
executions, 68; guUty of cor- 
rupt presentations, 105; the 
"she-eagle," 111; demanded 
appointment of her nominees 
to benefices, 115; accused bish- 
ops of inhospitality, 121; dis- 
like of marriages of bishops, 
121; refused to sign BUI re- 
pressing despoiling the univer- 
sities, 123 ; dislike of Cox, 139- 
40 

Elrington, Edward, married Mar- 
garet Spencer, 312 

Ely, Bishop of, had an inn in 
London, 10 

Ely, See of, remained vacant, 11 ; 
kept vacant by Queen, 105 



INDEX 



353 



Ely-palace, Bishop Cox robbed 
of, 132 

English Church, State of the, 31 

English Poete, The, by Spenser, 
Uhlemann and Sommer on, 
168; E. K, on, 262; never 
published, 265 

* * English ref ourmed Versify- 
ing, ' ' The Harvey-Spenser 
letters on, 257-58, 277 

Epistle, The, dedicated to Sidney, 
243 

Essex, First Earl of, a patron of 
the Puritans, 17 

Fables attack specific transac- 
tions, 39; when events de- 
scribed in, occurred, 44-45 

"Faerie Queene," The, begun, 
40; Puritanism of the, 153; 
allusion to Sidney in dedica- 
tory sonnet, 251-52 

"Farre country," A, London, 
113 

Fawkner, Maurice, committed to 
prison for sermon, 36 

February eclogue. The, refers to 
a political event, 39, 45-71 

Field and Wilcox, committed to 
Newgate, 23 

Fines, The system of, 5 n. 6; 
abuses of the, 114, 115, 151 

First Fruits Act, The, passed, 2 

Fleay, F. G., thinks Diggon 
Davie was Thomas Churchyard, 
18®; on Eosalind as Eose Din- 
ley, 213 

Fletcher, J. B., on composite 
work of Spenser and E. K., 
176; on Eosalind as represent- 
ing a lady-patron, 226; on the 
Areopagus and Pleiade, 260- 
61; on Sidney's Apologia and 
24 



Spenser's The English Poete, 
262 ; bardic notion of the poet, 
262, 263-65 

Floris, John, connected with 
Eosalind by N. J. Halpin, 210- 
12; marriage of, 212 

Fox, John, in the vestment con- 
troversy, 20; tutor to Duke of 
Norfolk, 54; assisted by 
Aylmer, 101 

Fox, Use of term, 127-28 

"Foxe," the, and the "Kidde," 
Fable of, 84-94, 342; Green- 
law on, 344 

"Foxe," The "false," of the 
Mother Hubberd's Tale 
(Burghley), 152 

Freake, Bishop, admonished by 
the Council, 6 

French poets, Critical doctrines 
of, applied in Calender, 260^61 

Fulham, Woods at, felled by 
Aylmer, 101 

Genres, Literary, recommended 
by the Areopagus, 280 

Gloss, the, Joint-editorship of, 
by Spenser and E. K., 176, 
178; date of composition of, 
177 

Goat, The, a widow, may repre- 
sent wife of first Earl of Essex, 
93-94 

Goodwin, Sir John, 335-36 

Gosson, Stephen, The School of 
Abuse, a ribald attack on 
poetry, 260 

Greenham, Eichard, identified as 
Diggon Davie, 113 n. 161, 192; 
sided with Cartwright, 192; 
pleased Cox with answer con- 
cerning schism, 193; deprived 
of his living, 193-94; devotion 



354 



INDEX 



of, to duties, 194-95; interest 
of, in Cambridge students, 
195; fits description of Diggon 
Davie, 195-96; generous treat- 
ment of, by Cox, 196; connect- 
ing-link between names, 196-97 

Greenlaw, E. A., on Mother Hub- 
herd's Tale, 321-24; on Spen- 
ser's discipleship of Chaucer, 
339-40 ; summary of the moral 
eclogues, 340-^1 ; theory of the 
February, 341; objections to, 
341-43; theory of Koffy and 
Lowder, 344— i6 ; chronology 
against theory of, 345 n. 12; 
misconception and failure of, 
346 

Greville, Fulke, member of the 
Areopagus, 259, 260 

Grey, Lady Jane, Bp. Aylmer 
tutor to, 100 

Grey de Wilton, Arthur, Lord 
Deputy of Ireland, 32G; enemy 
of Leicester, 326-29; in 
Queen's bad graces, 326-27; 
interested in poets and Cam- 
bridge, 333-34; connection of, 
with the Spencers of Althorpe, 
334-35 

Grindal, Archbishop, 3 n. 3; sued 
by Sandys, 6; a Puritan, 18; 
paradoxical acts of, 18; advo- 
cated expulsion of Cartwright, 
21-22; refused to suppress 
" prophesyings, " 28^29; bold 
words of, to Queen, 29; seques- 
tered by the Privy Council, 29 ; 
received Spenser's support, 40; 
alluded to in July eclogue, 44; 
praise of, in July eclogue, 99; 
sequestration of. 111; on ap- 
propriations, 125; on morality 



of the laity, 126; aroused the 
wrath of Leicester, 306; Spen- 
ser's praise of, 306 

Grosart, Dr., identified Diggon 
Davie with Jean Vander 
Noodt, 188; on Eosalind, 207 n. 
2; on Halpin's theory, 211; on. 
Fleay's theory, 213-14; on a 
not found Eose Dineley, 215 ; on 
localization of the Spensers, 
216; on Spenser's sentiment 
for Eosalind, 228; mentions the 
Areopagus, 258-59; error of, 
based on statement by Audrey, 
288; advocate of theory that 
Spenser lived in Lancashire, 
290-95; on the surname Spen- 
cer, 291; on the Calender as a 
northeast Lancashire produc- 
tion, 292-95 

Gualter in the vestment contro- 
versy, 20 

Guerau, Don, on Burghley's rela- 
tions to Norfolk, 62 

Hales, J. W., accepted Grosart 's 
theory of Eosalind, 215 n. 29 

Halpin, Eev. N. J., on Eosalind 
as Eose Daniel, wife of John 
Floris, 210-12 

Harington, Sir John, on Aylmer, 
100 

Harvey, Gabriel, friend of Spen- 
ser, 95; introduced in Septem- 
ber eclogue, 112 ; to Spenser on 
Eosalinde, 208, 223; member 
of the Areopagus, 258, 260, 
263, 277 n. 68; on visit to 
Queen at Audley End of depu- 
tation from Cambridge, 300-1 

Harvey-Spenser letters. The five, 
on "English refourmed Versi- 
fying," 257, 258 



INDEX 



356 



Hatton, Sir Christopher, At- 
tempted spoliation of Dr. 
Eichard Coxby, 131-32 

Herf ord opposed to ' ' Spenser is 
E. K." theory, 166; on E. K, 
172 n. 40 ; on " learned ' ' accre- 
tions in Calender, 270--73 

Hobbinol (Harvey) not a clergy- 
man, 43 n. 11; Cambridge the 
home of, 113; a spokesman, 
45; is Harvey, 165 

Holland and Belgium, The 
Queen's policy toward, waver- 
ing, 315 

Holy water, Use of words, 117 

Horace Ars Foetica, Draut's 
translation of, 264 

Home, Bp., expressed views ad- 
vocated by the Puritans, 37 

Hospitality, The ancient, no 
longer maintained, 76, 121-22 

Howard, Dr., opposed to theory 
of the Areopagus, 260 

Howard family, Spenser's knowl- 
edge of the, 70 n. 66 

Howland, Eichard, signer of 
Cartwright letters, Preferments 
for, 37; Puritan severity of, 
softened, 160-61 

Hughes, William, Maladministra- 
tion of see of St. Asaph's by, 
7-8 

Huguenots, Failures of, in 
France, 60 

Humphrey, Lawrence, a leader in 
the vestment controversy, 19- 
20 

Hunt, T. W., on Spenser's atti- 
tude toward Calvinism and 
Puritanism, 155-56; idea of, 
criticized, 158-59 

Huntingdon, Earl of, patron of 



the Puritans, 17; nephew of 
Cardinal Pole, 18 

Husbandman, The, believed to be 
Queen Elizabeth, 48-50, 63 

" Hymne in Honour of Love" 
and "Beautie," composed in 
youth, 41 

Impropriation of benefices, 9-10 

Initials, Constant use of, by liter- 
ary men, 176 

Insurrection of the northern 
Earls, 59, 60 

Interlocutors of the ecclesiastical 
eclogues, 181-203 ; Palinode 
(Dr. A. Perne), 181-84; 
Piers, 184—88; Diggon Davie, 
188^97; Thomalin, 197-203 

Ireland, Aim of Anglican and 
Puritan in, 161 

Irena, for Ireland, 164 

Irenaeus (Spenser) witnessed an 
execution in Ireland, 288 

Irreligion of the lower clergy, 151 

Irreverence and blasphemy of the 
people, 125-26 

Issues, Political and religious, 
inextricably bound together, 
39 

July eclogue. The, 99-112, 342- 
43 

Jusserand on Spenser and Eosa- 
lind, 226; discredited the 
Areopagus, 260 

K., E., on "the greate shepe- 
hearde" and Dido, 41-42; on 
identification of Cuddie with 
Colin, 41; silence of, in regard 
to the fables, 45; on the Oak's 
decay, 47; on "trees of state," 
48^9; on the "Coronall," 
49-50; on the purpose of May 
eclogue, 71; on types in the, 



356 



INDEX 



72; on the diatribe against 
titles, 79-81; on fleecing bene- 
fices, 80; disclaims the Ana- 
baptists, 81; offers explana- 
tion of fable of "Foxe" and 
"Kidde," 85-87; of "Or- 
phane," 89-90, 95-96; on the 
July eclogue, 102-3; on the 
purpose of September eclogue, 
112; explanation of "the 
great hunt," 128; on the tale 
of Eoffy, 128; on Rosalind, 
204, 208; on "the Widowes 
daughter," 218; on November 
eclogue, Lobbin, 231; on the 
great shepheard, 233; on Spen- 
cer's The English Poete, 262- 
63; ancient authors quoted by, 
282-83. See Kirke, Edward 

Keightley, Thomas, on Eosalind 
as a purely ideal being, 222 

Kelk, Dr., Master of Magda- 
lene, in quarrel with his fel- 
lows, 35 

Kid, the. Disastrous end- of, a 
warning, 94 

King, Edward, "E. K." inter- 
preted to be, 166 

King's College, Charges against 
Provost of, 109 

Kirke, Edward, 165-78 

Knollys, Lettice, mother of Essex, 
cousin of Queen Elizabeth, 
95 n. 116 

L., W., Verses to Spenser by, 256 

Lancashire, Theory of Spenser's 
having lived in northeast, re- 
futed, 289-95; P. W. Long on, 
290; F. C. Spencer on, 290-92 

Lands, Allotment of, to ministers, 
76 



Language, Controversial, of the 

Puritans, pastoral, 25-26 
Lecturers, Nomination of, pre- 
vented, 32 
Lee, Sidney, on E. K. 's indebted- 
ness to Spenser, 175; accepted 
Grosart's theory of Rosalind, 
215 n. 29; on Spenser's duties 
under Leicester, 314 
Leicester, Earl of, patron of the 
Puritans, 17; paradoxes in life 
of, 18; references to, in seven 
eclogues, 43; "the worthy" 
whom the Queen "loveth 
best, " 44 ; supporting Norfolk, 
58; charge of, against Burgh- 
ley, 62; thought Queen 
would refuse consent to exe- 
cution of Norfolk, 69; mulcted 
benefices, 74; relations of, with 
Lady Sheffield, 235, 238^2; 
origin of Spenser's connection 
with, 289; facts regarding, 
299-301; latest theory, 302- 
10; favorite of the Queen, 303; 
Spenser in service of, 31^16; 
in close connection with 
William of Orange, 315-16; 
secret marriage of, with Coun- 
tess of Essex, 322 ; in disgrace, 
323; Greenlaw on sacrifice of 
Spenser by, 324; regained 
Queen's confidence, 325-26; 
reasons of break vrith Spenser, 
329-32 

Lever, Thomas, on clerical cor- 
ruption, 108 

Libels, Punishment of so-called, 
45; charging Burghley with 
death of Norfolk, 62-63, 69; 
publicly scattered, 122 

Livings, Wretchedness of, 119-20 



INDEX 



357 



Livingg and licences, Church, 
Traffic in, 113, 151; corruption 
of the Archbishop of Canter- 
huTy'a courts, 114-15; com- 
plained of more by clergy than 
Puritans, 125 

Lobbin, a "greate shepheard," 
the Earl of Leicester, 231-32; 
lover and friend of Dido, 234 

Lodge, Thomas, on poeta nascitur, 
264-65 

Long, P. W., on Rosalind as 
Elizabeth North, 216-22; on 
Spenser and Lady Carey, 230 
n. 80; on Spenser's residence 
in Lancashire, 289-95 

Lordship, lovers of, Objections of 
Puritans to, 78-79, 106-7, 151 

Loves of poets given counterfeit 
names, 204-5; not anagrams, 
222 

Lowder, the name of Eoffy's 
dog, 136-37 

Lowell, J. R., on the Puritanism 
of Spenser, 153-54, 158; on 
Rosalind as Rose Daniel, 211 
n. 14, 225 n. 66 

Malone, Edmond, Anagram of, 
on Rosalind, 210; on Dido, 
234-35, 237, 238 

Mansilia, for Marchioness Helena, 
164 

Mantuan, Imitation of, 100, 103; 
assisted by Jodicua Badius, 
178 

Mantuan and Marot, E. K. 's in- 
accuracy concerning, 166-67 

Marian, for Margaret, 164 

Marot, December eclogue mod- 
elled upon, 167;. E. K. on, 170 

Martyr, Peter, invited by Duke 



of Norfolk to return to Eng- 
land, 57 

Mary Stuart, next in succession 
to Elizabeth, 2 ; on Norfolk as 
a Catholic, 56; Norfolk's 
scheme of marrying, 58^1; 
uncertain position of, 60 

May, Dr. John, refused Cart- 
wright degree of D.D., 22 

May eclogue, The, 71-99 

Meliboe for Melibeus, name ap- 
plied to Walsingham, 165 

Melville, Sir Robert, on the Duke 
of Norfolk, 56-57 

Metres, Difference of opinion of 
Sidney and Spenser regarding, 
279-80 

Millayn, fellow of Christ's Col- 
lege, expelled, 34-35 

Monasteries, Abolition of, by 
Henry VIII, 8 

Morrell, The shepherd, Bishop 
Aylmer, 99, 102; anagram for 
Elmore (Aylmer), 164 

< ' Mother Hubberd 's Tale, " " the 
raw conceipt of my youth," 
41, 90, 91 ; Satire in the, 123 

Musters, Lord North Commis- 
sioner of, 143-44 

Names representing persona, 163- 
65 

Norfolk, The Duke of, meant by 
the Oak, 51; reasons for Spen- 
ser 's interest in, 53-57 ; execu- 
tion of, 53, 151 ; High-Steward 
of Cambridge, 53; patron of 
Magdalene College, 54; com- 
manding position of, 54 ; prom- 
inent Puritans friends of, 54- 
55; never proved to be a 
Catholic, 55-56; most popular. 



358 



INDEX 



56-57; scheme of marrying the 
Queen of Scots, 58-61; im- 
prisoned in Tower, 59, 61; 
friends of, disgraced, 59; con- 
fession and execution of, 61; 
an event of greatest import, 
69; execution of, 151 

North, Elizabeth, identified as 
Kosalind hj P. W. Long, 216- 
17, 221-22 

North, Koger, second Lord, Com- 
plaints of, to Queen, against 
Bishop of Ely, 9; attempted 
spoliation of Dr. Kichard Cox 
by, 132-34, 145-48, 152; un- 
successful, 134; the Wolf 
meant to represent, 135; addi- 
tional reasons for Spenser's 
dislike of, 143-45; incidents in 
persecution of Cox appropriate 
to fable of Eoflfy, 145-49; 
corrupt practices of, 148; 
High-Steward of Isle of Ely, 
149; friendship of, with Lei- 
cester, 308 

North, Sir Thomas, supposed 
father of Eosalind, 216-17; 
"widow," 218-20 

North, Mrs. Thomas, 218-20 

"North countrye," The, 295; 
meaning Cambridge, 297 

Northampton, Church of, ' * Proph- 
esyings ' ' began in the, 27 

Northumberland, Earl of, warned 
by Norfolk, 59 

Norwich, Bishop of, refused a 
living to an husbandman, 15 

Norwich, Bishopric of, lost rev- 
enues through concealment 
commissioners, 13 

November eclogue, Lobbin in, 
231-32; a dirge for Dido, 232- 



34; modelled upon Marot's De 
Mme. Loyse, 233; a parallel to 
Virgil's Gnat, 242 

Nowell, Dean of St. Paul's, re- 
buked by Elizabeth, 4 

Nowell, Alexander, with Duke of 
Norfolk in his last days, 54-55 

Oak, the, and the Briar, Fable of, 
46-51; Greenlaw on the, 341- 
42, 343-^4 

Oath of allegiance. Penalties for 
refusal of, 3-4 

"Orphane," E. K. 's interpreta- 
tion of, 89, 95-96; explanation 
advanced, 90-94 

Padelford, F. M., on Spenser's 
Puritanism, 157; theory of, 
criticized, 158-59; on Spen- 
ser's spirit of patriotism, 161- 
62 

Palin, name for Peele, 165 

Palinode, a Catholic minister, 71 ; 
is Dr. Andrew Perne, 72, 89; 
specious defence of Anglican 
clergy by, 75, 82-83; meant to 
represent the Anglican clergy, 
82; argument for peace, 83- 
84; name satirizing Dr. An- 
drew Perne, 181-84 

Pan represents Henry VIII, 172; 
E. K. 's misstatements as to 
use of, 172-73 

Parish churches without incum- 
bents, 14; readers in, 16 

Parishes, vacant, 119-20 

Parker, Archbishop, Flagrant cor- 
ruption of, 5; dubbed "Pope 
of Lambeth," 25; and the Act 
of Uniformity, 18-19; ordered 
by Queen to suppress "proph- 
esyings," 28; admitted chil- 
dren to cures, 74; practice of 



INDEX 



359 



"spare!" by, 77; on the Puri- 
tans' objection to titles, 79; 
adjudicated dispute between 
Aylmer and Cooper^ 101; de- 
fence of court of Faculties, 
114; rapacity of, for grants 
and leases, 120-21; charged 
Burghley with spoiling the 
Church, 123; on conditions in 
the diocese of Norwich, 124 

Parker, John, Property bestowed 
on, by father, 120-21 

Parkhurst, approved * ' prophesy- 
ings," 27, 2S 

Patrimonium crucifixi, 106 

Patron of my young Muses, 253, 
254, 257 

Pegaso, Segnior, Spenser called 
her, by Kosalinde, 208, 223, 
224, 230 

Pembroke, Countess of, Dedica- 
tory sonnet to, in Faerie 
Queene, 244, 251-52; dedica- 
tion of Buines of Time to, 244, 
252-53 

Pembroke, Second Earl of, a 
patron of the Puritans, 17 

Penal Bill aimed at Catholics, 3 

People, Moral condition of the, 
125-26 

Perigot, Buck on the love story 
of, 302 

Perne, Dr. Andrew, identified 
with Palinode, 72, 89; charac- 
teristics of, 72; object of Spen- 
ser's attack, 98; a symbol of 
the inherent corruption in the 
Church, 151; notorious for 
change of views, 181-82; ridi- 
culed by the scholars at Cam- 
bridge, 182; nicnamed old 
father Palinode, 183; Harvey 



on, 183-84; disliked by Spen- 
ser, 184 

Petrarch, Quotation from, 169; 
father of amatory poets, 226 

Philisides, anagram for Philip 
Sidney, 164 

Phillips, Edward, Errors of, 288- 
89 

Piers, a spokesman, 45; a Protes- 
tant minister, 71; is Thomas 
Preston, 72; attack of, in 
method of the Puritans, 73 ; on 
corruption of the pastors, 73- 
74; on the Apostolic Church, 
77-78; parable of the Wolves, 
Sl-82 ; bitter reply of, to Pali- 
node, 84; fable of the "Foxe" 
and the "Kidde," 84-89; of 
each eclogue, the same, 184; 
may have been Thomas Pres- 
ton, 185-87 

Pilkington, James, Bishop of 
Durham, paid enormous rent 
for recovery of lands, 11; a 
Puritan, 17 

Pilkington, John, Dean of Dur- 
ham, summoned by the Lords 
of the Council, 6 ; a Puritan, 17 

Plato, Knowledge of, shown, 167- 
68-; study of, at Cambridge, 
263, 281 

Pleiade, The, of Konsard and Du 
Bellay, Parallelism of the 
Areopagus with, 257-58, 265, 
267, 270, 274, 280-81 

Poet, The (Spenser), and his pa- 
trons, 231-57 

Poet, Platonic theory of function 
of, 262; Spenser, Sidney, and 
others familiar with the, 263- 
65 



360 



INDEX 



Poetic diction, The new, 267-69; 
Fletcher '3 classification of, 
269-74; "homespun" revived 
words (archaisms), 269-70; 
learned accretions, 270-74 

Poetry, The base condition of, 
lamented, 268-69 

Popish practices in churches, 14, 
68 

Popishnes3 in Church of Eng- 
land, 73 

Premunire, A, penalty for re- 
fusing oath of allegiance, 3; 
the statute of, 4 n. 4 

Preston, Thomas, identified with 
Piers, 72; author of Cambyses, 
185; recognition of, by the 
Queen, 186; opinions of, those 
of Piers, 186; Puritanism of, 
187; represented by Piers, 
187-88 

Privy Council, Members of the, 
17 n. 57 

Prophesyings, 27-29 ; Queen com- 
manded Parker to suppress, 28, 
111 

Protestant party, how conciliated, 
3 

Protestant ranks. Split in the, 
83-84, 156 

Protestants, Learned, kept out of 
livings, 117 n. 168 

Purefoy, University proctor, op- 
posed new statutes, 32 

Puritan, First use of the word, 
16; wide application of, 17-18, 
29 

Puritan dissatisfaction, Eising 
tide of, 31 

Puritan point of view, Spenser 
differs from the, 124 



Puritans, The, complained of 
ignorance of the clergy, 15; 
their relation to the ecclesias- 
tical policy of Elizabeth, 16- 
30, 38; views of, on discipline, 
17; nobles and church digni- 
taries who favored the, 17-18; 
the vestment controversy, 
19-20; the Cartwright-Whit- 
gift struggle, 21-25; chief ob- 
jections of, to Anglican Church, 
24-25 ; controversial language 
of the, 25-26; attempt of, to 
reform the Church from within, 
26-29; held minor church posi- 
tions, 31; marked by open ex- 
pression of views, 37; prosecu- 
tion of the, 88 ; Spenser 's warn- 
ing to the, 88-8d; the shell -fish, 
111 ; warned against the Angli- 
cans, 151; split between, and 
Anglicans, 19, 83-84, 156; did 
not support the Martinists, 
159-60 

Eeformers exiled during reign of 
Mary, 3 n. 3; imbibed Calvin- 
istie principles from the Swiss 
divines, 18 

Ehys, Ernest, on "E. K." as 
Spenser, 166 

Eidolfi conspiracy, The, 60 

Eobsart, Amy, suggested as 
meant by Dido, 242 

Eoffy, Hobbinol's praise of, 42- 
43 

Eoffy, Lowder, and the "Wolf, 
The fable of, 128-31; Gros- 
art's identification of Eoffy 
with Dr. John Young absurd, 
128-30; refers to depredation 
of Church property by a cour- 
tier, 130; explanation ad- 



INDEX 



361 



vanced, 131-35; the Wolf 
meant to represent Lord North, 
135; the name Roffy, 135-36; 
the name Lowder, 136-37; Dr. 
Eichard Cox defended in the 
person of Roffy, 138-39, 150; 
incidents in North's persecu- 
tion of Cox appropriate to, 
145^9; the Wolf imitated 
voices of Eoffy and Lowder, 
148^9 

Eogers, Daniel, sent by Leicester 
to the Low Countries, 316 

Romance of Colin, Separation of 
eclogues from, 42 

Eome, Thomalin refers to London 
as, 105-6; source of Church 
corruption, 113 

Bosa linda, the beautiful rose, 
222 

Rosalind came into Spenser's 
life, When, 43; no satisfactory 
clue to identity of, 203; refer- 
ences to, in the Calender, 204- 
8; E. K, declared a feigned 
name, 204, 20&; "the Wid- 
dowes daughter of the glenne, ' ' 
205, 217-22; Harvey on, 208, 
223; accepted as an anagram, 
208; Dry den and Drayton on, 
209, 213; Ralph Church's 
guess, 209-10; N. J. Halpin 
on, 210-12; F. G. Fleay on, 
213-14; Grosart on, 215-16; 
P. W. Long on, 214, 215-22; 
Thomas Keightley's theory of, 
222-24; an absurd theory, 223; 
not an imaginary being, 224; 
no solutions convincing, 225; 
F. J. Child on, 211 n. 14, 225- 
26; Jusserand on, 226; J. B. 
Fletcher on, 226-27; not the 



object of a deep-rooted pas- 
sion, 227-29 ; represents attach- 
ment of a young poet to a 
lady -patron, 230-31 ; surmises 
regarding, 310-13 

Rosalindula, Altera, 208, 224 

Eoss, Bishop of, Mary Stuart's 
agent. Confession of, 61 

Buines of Time, The, 90 

"Eymer," Spenser calls himself 
a, 172 

St. John's College, New statutes 
at, 36; disputes in, 141; Dr. 
StUl made Master, 141; Com- 
mission for new statutes for, 
142 

Sampson, Thomas, a leader in the 
vestment controversy, 19-20 ; 
friend of Norfolk, 55; accused 
Cox of a pompous life, 150 

Sandys, Friction between Grindal 
and, 6; sued by Aylmer, 7; a 
Puritan, 18; approved "proph- 
esyings," 28; on Aylmer, 101; 
on clerical abuses, 108; charged 
with greed, 142; on Wilcox 
and Field, 200 

Satire, Political and ecclesias- 
tical, 1-162 

Satire, Spenser's political and 
ecclesiastical, True intent of, 
38 

Scambler, Bp. of Peterborough, 
approved the "prophesyings," 
27 

Scory, Bishop of Hereford, 3, n. 
3; notorious for simony, 5-6 

Second Admonition to the Parlia- 
ment, A, by Cartwright, 23 

September eclogue. The, 112-50 

Sheffield, Douglas, Lady, had 
daughter by Leicester, 235; 



362 



INDEX 



married to Lord Sheffield, 238; 
relations of, to Leicester, 238- 
42 J B. W. Greenfield on, 238- 
40 

Shepherd, Dr. Nicolas, Master of 
St. John's College, expelled, 
141-42 

' ' Shepherd 's Calender, ' ' Parts 
of, composed at the University, 
40i; when begun, 41; circulated 
in ms., 41 ; allegory in, relates 
to prominent persons, 44; first 
edition of, 45 

Shepherd's Calender, The, and 
the Areopagus, 257-86 

Shepperd, Dr. Nicolas, of St. 
John's, expelled, 35-36 

Sidney, Ambrosia, meant by 
Dido, 235-37 

Sidney, Mary, like Kosalind, 231 

Sidney, Philip, Connection of 
Spenser with, 243-57; when 
Spenser made acquaintance 
with, 289, 290-301, 302-10; 
movements of, 299-301 ; pas- 
sion of, for Stella, 303 

Sidney's Apologie for Poetrie, 
Purpose of, 260 

Simony in the diocese of Nor- 
wich, 124 

Singleton, Hugh, brought out 
first edition of the * * Calender, ' ' 
45 

Smith, C. G. Moore, on Ambrosia 
Sidney as Dido, 235-37 

Some, Eobert, member of Cart- 
wright's party, 21; prefer- 
ments for, 37 

Somersham, North's efforts to 
take, from Cox, 145-46 

Sommer, H. O., editor of reprint 



of Calender, 166; not very 
accurate, 168 n. 23 

" Southpartes " understood to be 
London, 298 

Spencer and Spenser, Spelling of 
the name, 291-92 

Spencer, F. C, on Spenser's resi- 
dence in Lancashire, 290-92 

Spencer, Sir John, of Althorpe, 
311, 313; connection of, with 
Lord Grey, 334-35 

Spencer, Margaret, married to 
Giles Allington, 311; to Ed- 
ward Elrington, 312; perhaps 
original of Eosalind, 313 

Spenser at Cambridge, 30; at- 
tacked Popish ministers, 34; 
an ardent Puritan, 39-40; sup- 
ported Grindal, 40; methods of 
composition, 40-41; events in 
life of, 43-44; interested in 
religious controversies, 44 ; 
reasons for his interest in the 
Duke of Norfolk, 53-57; igno- 
rant of the secret transactions 
which led to Norfolk's ruin, 
57, 61; knowledge of the 
Howard family, 70 n. 66; con- 
nection of, with Leicester, 95; 
attack of, on the Anglican 
Church, 98-99; hatred of traf- 
fic in Church livings, 143; 
loyalty and indignation of, 
150; an out-and-out Puritan, 
152-53 ; variation of early from 
later attitude, 153; change in 
views of, towards Puritans, 
158; criticism of Padelford's 
and Hunt's ideas, 158-60; 
reasons for change of religious 
views of, 160-62 ; tempered by 
experience of men, 160; his 



INDEX 



363 



residence in Ireland, 161; em- 
ployrnent of, by the govern- 
ment, 161; love of, for Eliza- 
beth Boyle, 162 ; a low Church- 
man, 162; theory that " E. K. " 
is Spenser himself, 166-70; 
gave sources from memory, 
166-67; knowledge of Plato, 
167-68' ; distich from Cicero, 
168-69; quotation from Pe- 
trarch, 169; intimacy of, with 
commentator, 169'-70 ; not 
identical with E. K., 170; 
reasons, literary taste and 
knowledge of the Calender, 
170^73; would not praise him- 
self, 170; evidence of use of 
words, 173-75; absence of 
comments to August eclogue, 
175; Prof. Fletcher's theory of 
"joint-editorship," 176; E. 
K, 's friendship with Harvey 
and, 177-78i; Eosalind on, 208, 
223; name of, read as Spicer, 
211; most personal expression 
of feeling of, toward Eosalind, 
227; Grosart on, 228; compli- 
ment of, to Eosalind, 230; at- 
tachment of, to a lady-patron, 
231; member of the Areop- 
agus, 259; motives of, in 
writing the Calender, 261; not 
to advocate principles alone 
entertained by the Areopagus, 
261 ; critical opinions of Sidney 
and, the expression of one 
school, 262; familiar with 
Plato, 263; had "in some use 
of familiarity" by Sidney, 
263; imitated Chaucer, 267; 
lamented base condition of 
poetry, 268; study of language 



and grammar of, a desideratum, 
268 n. 38; points of variance 
of, with Sidney, 269, 270, 274, 
275, 277, 280-82, 283, 286; 
anomalies in language of, 273; 
habit of telling time by the 
firmament, 276; on program of 
Sidney's circle, 277-78; influ- 
ence of Sidney on, 279; con- 
tributions in form to program 
of Areopagus, 280; men imi- 
tated by, 282 ; aspired to be 
the New Poet, 283; selection 
of a patron by, 284-86 ; change 
in literary views of, 286; dis- 
cipleship of Chaucer, 339 ; 
cumulative effect of satire of, 
340-41; did not lament decay 
of Catholic religion, 342 

Spenser, Biography of, 1576- 
1580, 286-338 

Spicer or Spencer, Eose, 211, 212 

Still, Dr. John, of St. John's, as- 
sailed by John Cock, 36 ; pre- 
ferments for, 37; made Master 
of St. John's College, 141-42; 
changed his views, 160 

Strype on concealed lands, 13 

Stubbs, John, Punishment of, for 
The Gaping Gulf, 45, 322-23 

Style, Opulence of, in program of 
the Areopagus, 275-77 

Styward, Austen, sold a lease of 
Downham to North, 146-47 

Sussex, Earl of, Advowson of, 
passed to and fro, 10; on irre- 
ligious condition of the people, 
14 

Symonds, J. A., on the Areopagus 
as a little academy, 259 

Syntax, Elevation of the, 274-75; 
Sidney on, 275 



364 



INDEX 



Syrinx represents Anne Boleyn, 

172 
Theana, for Anne, 164 
Thomalin, Thomas Wilcox, 102; 

three divisions of speech of, 

103-11 
Thomalin of the July eclogue, 

198-203 
Thomalin of the March eclogue, 

E. K. on the, 197-98 
Tityrus, name applied to Chaucer, 

165 
Todd on "E. K." as Edward 

Kirke, 165-66 
Travers, John, of Cork, 290 
"Trees of state," E. K. on, 48- 

49; represent prominent men, 

51, 63 
Uhlemann-Sommer theory that 

"E. K." is Spenser, 166-70 
Universities, Arbitrary action of 

Elizabeth towards the, 12 
Urania, name for Countess of 

Pembroke, 165 
Verses Addressed to the Author 

by W. L., 256 
Vestment controversy, The, 19- 

20, 103-5 
View, A, of Antichrist, his laws, 

and ceremonies in our English 

Church, by Anthony Gilby, 80 
"Virgil's Gnat," dedicated to 

the late Earle of Leicester, 40 
Walford on the language of the 

Calender, 293-94 
Ward, Mrs. Humphrey, on the 

Areopagus, 259 
Webbe, W., seta forth Platonic 

theory of poet's art, 281-82; 

regarded the Calender as a 

Cambridge production, 283 



Whitehead refused Archbishopric 
of Canterbury, 3 n. 3 

Whitgift, Controversy of, with 
Cartwright, 22-23 ; wrote 
Answer to the Admonition, 24; 
and Defense, 24; drew up new 
statutes of Cambridge Univer- 
sity, 31 

Widow for widower, 218 

"Widowes daughter, The, of the 
glenne," 205, 213, 217-22, 224 

Wilcox, Thomas, represented by, 
Thomalin, 102; summoned be- 
fore Parker, 199; author, with 
John Field of the Admonition 
to the Parliament, imprisoned, 
200; released, lost his prefer- 
ment, cited before Aylmer, 
201; reasons for believing 
Thomalin meant for, 202-3 

Wilkes, sent to the Low Countries 
by Leicester, 316 

William of Orange, Leicester's 
relations with, 315-16 

Winchester, See of, Subsidies 
upon the, 9 n. 23 

Winstanley, Lillian, on Spenser 
and Puritanism, 156-57, 158 

Wolf, Use of word, 126-28 

Wolf, Warnings against the, 341 ; 
Greenlaw on the, 345-46 

Wolves, Piers' parable of the, 
81-82 

Woodford, Samuel, Misstatement 
of, 288 

Wrenoek, for Pembroke, 164 

Wright, Eobert, tutor of young 
Earl of Essex, 92, 95 

Young, Archbishop of York, 
Greed of, 6 

Yoimg, Dr. John, made bishop of 
Eochester, 128-29; a thorough- 
going Anglican, 130 



COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 

Columbia noiyersity in the City of New York 



m). 




The Press was incorporated June 8, 1893, to promote the publication 
of the results of original research. It is a private corporation, related di- 
rectly to Columbia University by the provisions that its Trustees shall be 
officers of the University and that the President of Columbia University 
shall be President of the Press. 



The publications of the Columbia University Press include works on 
Biography, History, Economics, Education, Philosophy, Linguistics, and 
Literature, and the following series : 

Columbia Uniyersity Contributione to Anthropology. 

Columbia Uniyersity Biological Series. 

Columbia University Studies in Cancer and Allied Subjects. 

Columbia University Studies in Classical Philology. 

Columbia University Studies in Comparative Literature. 

Columbia University Studies in English. 

Columbia Uniyersity Geological Series. 

Columbia University Germanic Studies. 

Columbia University Indo-Iranian Series. 

Columbia University Contributions to Oriental History and 

Philology. 
Columbia University Oriental Studies. 

Columbia University Studies in Romance Philology and Liter- 
ature. 
Blumenthal Lectures. Hewitt Lectures. 

Carpentier Lectures. Jesup Lectures. 

Julius Beer Lectures. 
Catalogues will be sent free on application. 



Lemcke & BuECHNER, Agcnts 

So-3a WEST ajth ST., HEW YORK 



COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 



STUDIES IN ENGLISH AND COMPARATIVE LITERATURE 



ENGLISH 
Joseph Glanvill. By Ferris Greenslet, Ph.D., Cloth, i2mo, pp. xi + 235. 

Price, $1.50 net. 
The Elizabethan Lyric. By John Erskine, Ph.D., Qoth, izmo, pp. xvi 

+ 344. Price $1.50 net. 
Classical Echoes in Tennyson. By Wilfred P. Mustard, Ph.D., Cloth, 

i2mo, pp. xvi + 164. Price, $1.25 net. 

Sir Walter Scott as a Critic of Literature. By Margaret Ball, Ph.D., 

Paper, 8vo, pp. x + 188. Price, $1.00 net. 
The Early American Novel. By Lillie Deming Loshe, Ph.D., Paper, 8vo, 

pp. vii + 131- Price $1.00 net. 
Studies in New England Transcendentalism. By Harold C. Goddard, 

Ph.D., Paper, 8vo, pp. x + 217. Price, $1.00 net. 

A Study of Shelley's Drama "The Cenci." By Ernest Sutherland 
Bates, Ph.D., Paper, 8vo, pp. ix + 103. Price, $1.00 net. 

Verse Satire in England before the Renaissance. By Samuel Marion 
Tucker, Ph.D., Paper, Svo, pp. xi + 245. Price, $1.00 net. 

The Accusative with Infinitive and Some Kindred Constructions in 

English. By Jacob Zeitlin, Ph.D., Paper, Svo, pp. xi + 177. Price, 

$1.00 net. 
Government Regulation of the Elizabethan Drama. By Virginia Cro- 

cheron Gildersleeve, Ph.D., Cloth, Svo, pp. vii + 259. Price, $1.25 

net. 
The Stage History of Shakespeare's King Richard the Third. By Alice 

I. Perry Wood, Ph.D., Cloth, Svo, pp. xi + 186. Price, $1.25 net. 
The Shaksperian Stage. By Victor E. Albright, Ph.D., Cloth, Svo, pp. 

xii + 194. Price, $1.50 net. 
Thomas Carlyle as a Critic of Literature. By Frederick W. Roe, Ph.D., 

Cloth, Svo, pp. xi + 152. Price $1.25 net. 
Leigh Hunt's Relations with B3T:on, Shelley and Keats. By Barnette 

Miller, Ph.D. Svo, cloth, pp. vii + 169, $1.25 net. 
The Authorship of Timon of Athens. By Ernest Hunter Wright, Ph.D., 

Cloth, Svo, pp. ix + 104. Price $1.25 net. 
English Tragicomedy, Its Origin and History. By Frank H. Ristine, 

Ph.D., Cloth, Svo, pp. XV + 247. Price, $1.50 net. 

LEMCKE & BUECHNER, Agents 
30-32 West 27th Street New York 



COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 



STUDIES IN ENGLISH AND COMPARATIVE LITERATURE 



ENGLISH 
John Dennis. His Life and Criticism. By Harry G. Paul, Ph.D. Cloth, 

8vo, pp. viii + 229. Portrait. Price, $1.25 net. 

The Rise of the Novel of Manners. By Charlotte E. Morgan, Ph.D. 
Cloth, 8vo, pp. ix + 271. Price, $1.50 net. 

The Political Prophecy in England. By Rupert Taylor, Ph.D. Cloth, 

8vo, pp. XX + 165. Price, $1.25 net. 

The Middle English Penitential Lyric. By Frank Allen Pattersok, 
Ph.D. Cloth, Svo, pp. ix + 203. Price, $1.50 net. 

The 'Soliloquies of Shakespeare. By Morris LeRoy Arnold, Ph.D. 
Cloth, Svo, pp. X + 177- Price, $1.25 net. 

The Exemplum in the Early Religious and Didactic Literature of Eng- 
land. By Joseph Albert Mosher, Ph.D. Cloth, Svo, pp. xi + 150. 
Price, $1.25 net. 

New Poems by James L of England. Edited by Allan F. Westcott, Ph.D. 
Cloth, Svo, pp. xci + 121. Price, $1.50 net. 

Thomas Dekker. A Study. By Mary Leland Hunt, Ph.D. Cloth, Svo, 
pp. xiii + 212. Price, $1.25 net. 

Mathew Carey. Editor, Author and Publisher. By Earl L. Bradsher, 
Ph.D. Cloth, Svo, pp. xi + 144. Price, $1.25 net. 

Literary Influences in Colonial Newspapers, 1704-1750. By Elizabeth 
Christine Cook, Ph.D. Cloth, i2mo, pp. . In press. 

Lord Byron as a Satirist in Verse. By Claude M. Fuess, Ph.D. Cloth, 
i2mo. In press. 

Spencer's " Shepherd Calender " in Relation to Contemporary Affairs. 
By James Jackson Higginson, Ph.D. Cloth, i2mo, pp. xiv + 364. 
In press. 

LEMCKE & BUECHNER, Agents 
30-32 West 27th Street New York 



COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 



STUDIES IN ENGLISH AND COMPARATIVE LITERATURE 



COMPARATIVE LITERATURE 

Romances of Roguery. By Frank Wadleigh Chandler, Ph.D. Part I. 
The Picaresque Novel in Spain. Cloth, i2mo, pp. ix + 483. Price, 
$2.00 net. 

A History of Literary Criticism in the Renaissance. By Joel Elias 
Spingarn, Ph.D. Second edition, revised and augmented. Cloth, 
i2mo, pp. xi + 330. Price, $1.50 net. 

Flatonism in English Poetry of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Cen- 
turies. By John Smith Harrison, Ph.D. Cloth, i2mo, pp. xi + 235. 
Price, $2.00 net. 

Irish Life in Irish Fiction. By Horatio Sheafe Krans, Ph.D. Cloth, 
i2mo, pp. vii + 338. Price, $1.50 net. 

The English Heroic Play. By Lewis Nathaniel Chase, Ph.D. Cloth, 
i2mo, pp. xii + 250. Price, $2.00 net. 

The Oriental Tale in England in the Eighteenth Century. By Martha 
Pike Conant, Ph.D. Cloth, izmo, pp. xxvi + 312- Price, $2.00 net. 

The French Influence in English Literature. By Alfred Horatio Upham, 
Ph.D. Cloth, i2mo, pp. ix + 560. Price, $2.00 net. 

The Influence of Moliere on Restoration Comedy. By Dudley H. 
Miles, Ph.D. Cloth, i2mo, pp. xi + 272. Price, $1.50 net. 

The Greek Romances in Elizabethan Prose Fiction. By Samuel Lee 
Wolfe, Ph.D. Cloth, i2rao. Price, $2.00 net. 

The Commedia dell'Arte. A Study in Italian Popular Comedy. By 
Winifred Smith, Ph.D, Cloth, i2mo, pp. xv + 290. Illustrated. Price, 
$2.00 net. 



LEMCEE & BUECHNER, Agents 
30-32 West 27th Street New York 



.-^^^ -^ 






■'^o^ 



< -r_, 








Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Feb. 2009 

PreservationTechnologies \ 

fl WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 






-bo^ 









-4 -r. 




.'»-' 


















ci. ^ 



.^^ -^^^ 



xO^^. 



v^ 















X 

^x^^" '^^.- 









^j. 



^^ ^^f:l. 



^^^^^:^:!^>./^ .^\c. 






o 












V » ^ 















' » k 

I 



XV,-^ 



•^^•. 




